Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Germans won’t heat their homes even with free electricity?

kaikenhuippu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 397 posts

Re: Why Germans won’t heat their homes even with free electricity?

#351

Post by marcus_holmes »

lispm wrote: post #322
luckylion wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is not what is happening. The goal is to have more than 85% reneable energy for electricity production in 2050. I believe the point was that, because of the subsidies that are included in the price for electricity, that electricity isn't used for what it could be because it's more expensive than fossil-fuel options. Even if there was 100% renewable energy for electricity production in 2050, that wouldn't help…

There is not really a separate price for fossil fuel electricity. And renewable energy has preference: if renewable energy is available, it will be used with preference. > Even if there was 100% renewable energy for electricity production in 2050, that wouldn't help with emissions that stem from heating unless you'd also make people heat with electricity. And to do that, you'd need to lower the prices (or raise the p…

>> Even if there was 100% renewable energy for electricity production in 2050, that wouldn't help with emissions that stem from heating unless you'd also make people heat with electricity. And to do that, you'd need to lower the prices (or raise the prices of alternatives).

>That's right. In a future with large electricity surplus it makes sense to switch to electricity for heating. To make that attractive new price models are needed.

Again, maybe read the article before commenting. Because the article explains how the pricing structure is incentivising people to continue using fossil fuels, even with a large electricity surplus.

Re: Why Germans won’t heat their homes even with free electricity?

#352

Post by marcus_holmes »

ryder9 wrote: post #338
marcus_holmes wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Creating more renewable energy is pointless unless it reduces/replaces the use of fossil fuels. Having more energy than we need is useless, and there's an environmental footprint to even the greenest wind farm. The point the article is making is that because of the way the renewable industry is being funded (from taxes on electricity consumption), consumers are opting to continue burning fossil fuels rather then use…

[citation required] for a lot of these ridiculous claims

[points at article]

Re: Why Germans won’t heat their homes even with free electricity?

#353

Post by baybal2 »

dusted wrote: post #167
serpix wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modern air pumps work with good efficiency even down to around -15c which is a rare temperature for post global warming world.

Except some places in Russia it's still common to go below -20, and in a post-global warming world, these areas will likely experience a new ice-age. Electricity is the best bet, as gas can freeze too, while copper just becomes able to carry higher loads.

> gas can freeze too

Man, please look up methane freezing point

Re: Why Germans won’t heat their homes even with free electricity?

#354

Post by baybal2 »

ilkkao wrote: post #175
DoreenMichele wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you. But how do you hang wet clothes and not ruin your floors? Sorry if I sound stupid. American apartments aren't set up for this and I would rather handle it this way and I've had challenges.

All modern washing machines spin >1000 RPM in the end. Clothes are pretty dry already after that, there's no dripping.

> Clothes are pretty dry already after that

Dry and very wrinkled

Re: Why Germans won’t heat their homes even with free electricity?

#355

Post by jokoon »

throwaway023421 wrote: post #301
jokoon wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The waste is a non-problem, especially when you compare with co2 over decades. Nuclear energy emits less co2 than renewables: it requires less metals (especially if you store electricity with batteries or other means), and renewables are not baseload energies, meaning you need to burn either coal or gas when there's no sun or wind. Wind mills require a lot of metals, and installing them is complicated. Solar panels r…

You are comparing CO2 emission and use of metal and completely ignore the catastrophic systemic risk of nuclear power. There has been many events where nuclear waste has been dumped in the ocean, misplaced, lost, improperly buried, leaked in rivers, caught fire and even deliberately used in projectiles and dispersed in the environment. And this is nothing compared to the risk of exposing large amounts of waste during…

fear mongering

please have actual figures about death and cancer, and compare them with car exhaust and air quality

it is illegal to dump nuclear waste

Re: Why Germans won’t heat their homes even with free electricity?

#356

Post by jokoon »

imtringued wrote: post #283
jokoon wrote: post #220

Jean Marc Jancovici is a french energy expert, and he often talks about Germany. An important story to remember about Germany, is how Fukushima led the country to stop using nuclear power. Merkel has a PhD in physics, so naturally she understands that nuclear power is green and just better than renewable and coal. But after Fukushima, she was forced to stop nuclear plants, because as Jancovici argued, she is an "asse…

Oh, so nuclear power plants amortize themselves in less than 10 years? I didn't know that!

you will need energy in 50 years, so the medium term metric is useless

investors only care about short term and medium term

Re: Why Germans won’t heat their homes even with free electricity?

#357

Post by mattrp »

diffeomorphism wrote: post #204

I feel this article is missing the forest for the trees: > German electricity consumers paid 80 million euros in tariffs to get 8 million euros worth of wind power to the market. > There is simply no point to make any market-driven investments in Germany; the tariffs are simply too large compared to the market value of electricity. > (...) > This might not be a problem if “getting more renewables” is the end-goal one…

It also doesn’t state what is obvious to those of us who build infrastructure: Germany and Denmark have no way to store wind power so it has no choice but to pay others to take it. Norway is home to one of the worlds largest batteries.. its hydro power. Already cheap, but has the added benefit of being storable for sufficient duration to take german and danish wind power when it suits them (ie when they get paid). It baffles the mind why the danish and Germans don’t use some of their subsidy to invest in storage — but therein lies another catch 22. The lithium needed for that isn’t being mined in sufficient quantities in Europe and 100% of the supply from China is earmarked to autos. There are some jr mining countries spinning up in Europe but it will be awhile before any meaningful impact will be felt. One wonders if by then other storage techniques will be viable. In the meantime, they will be forced to pay the Nordics to take their green energy while supplementing with coal from Poland or succumbing to the siren call of another controversial Russian pipeline.

Re: Why Germans won’t heat their homes even with free electricity?

#358

Post by lispm »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #351
lispm wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is not really a separate price for fossil fuel electricity. And renewable energy has preference: if renewable energy is available, it will be used with preference. > Even if there was 100% renewable energy for electricity production in 2050, that wouldn't help with emissions that stem from heating unless you'd also make people heat with electricity. And to do that, you'd need to lower the prices (or raise the p…

>> Even if there was 100% renewable energy for electricity production in 2050, that wouldn't help with emissions that stem from heating unless you'd also make people heat with electricity. And to do that, you'd need to lower the prices (or raise the prices of alternatives). >That's right. In a future with large electricity surplus it makes sense to switch to electricity for heating. To make that attractive new price…

Again, the article is misleading and fails to understand the German electricity markets (!), how the EEG works, how the electricity production/distribution/sales works in Germany, the pricing and how consumers buy electricity.

For example: the renewable produced electricity is delivered onto the grid and the distribution takes it. As much as is possible. This is mixed with non-renewable electricity. The consumer then gets delivered the mix. The normal consumer has no choice - he always gets the mix. He/she can't prefer fossil fuels or renewable. If there is more coal generated electricity, the renewable energy electricity has a preference. By law:

https://www.buzer.de/s1.htm?g=eeg_2009&a=8

'Netzbetreiber sind vorbehaltlich des § 11 verpflichtet, den gesamten angebotenen Strom aus Erneuerbaren Energien und aus Grubengas unverzüglich vorrangig abzunehmen'

translates: 'Grid companies ... are required to take all provided electricity generated from renewable energies ... immediately and with preference.'

That's the German law, the EEG, the renewable energy law.

Thus there is simply no choice: ALL AVAILABLE RENEWABLE ENERGY IS PUSHED INTO THE GRID IMMEDIATELY WITH PREFERENCE.

The provider of renewable energy gets a guaranteed price, based on some calculations. The goal is that this price goes down over the years.

Additionally coal gets further price burdens, which last year had an effect that a lot of coal was driven out of the market, because coal generated electricity was suddenly much less competitive.

Currently there is no time in Germany when renewable energy electricity drives the country 100% or more. There are weekends with lots of wind where we reach 60%. These days are still relatively rare.

On these days the consumer can not choose to get more wind electricity, since he AUTOMATICALLY gets as much as possible via the mix provided by the grid.

The producer gets his price. Now there might be additional capacity available and there might not be a buyer for it. Thus the price on the spot market gets zero for some short period of time or even negative.

But for me as an end consumer I can't choose what kind of electricity I get delivered. What I can influence is where I buy the electricity from and where the profits from that are invested. For example I buy my electricity from a local provider, which invests in renewable energy. The company not only buys renewable energy on the market, but also has its own renewable energy production. The provider invests their profits into more renewable energy production.

For coal its currently tough to make any profits and they are slowly driven out of the market:

https://www.tagesspiegel.de/wirtschaft/hunderte-millionen-ve...

Last year in the first half brown coal power plants were 650 Million Euros in the red.

Thus the consumer doesn't give the coal power plants any advantage.

The added capacity of renewable produced electricity is each year planned (but not completely determined) and the government has instruments to influence that.

Re: Why Germans won’t heat their homes even with free electricity?

#359

Post by luckylion »

lispm wrote: post #322
luckylion wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is not what is happening. The goal is to have more than 85% reneable energy for electricity production in 2050. I believe the point was that, because of the subsidies that are included in the price for electricity, that electricity isn't used for what it could be because it's more expensive than fossil-fuel options. Even if there was 100% renewable energy for electricity production in 2050, that wouldn't help…

There is not really a separate price for fossil fuel electricity. And renewable energy has preference: if renewable energy is available, it will be used with preference. > Even if there was 100% renewable energy for electricity production in 2050, that wouldn't help with emissions that stem from heating unless you'd also make people heat with electricity. And to do that, you'd need to lower the prices (or raise the p…

> There is not really a separate price for fossil fuel electricity. And renewable energy has preference: if renewable energy is available, it will be used with preference.

Sure, sure, the issue is that you can use electricity or fossil fuels for heating. If the prices are massively different, people cannot afford to go green.

Having super high prices for consumers while essentially subsidizing industry seems like a problematic approach, and one that primarily hits the lower classes, as a higher electricity bill will very much directly affect their bottom line. Combining this with a subsidy policy framework for renewables that also primarily the upper middle & upper class profit from, this looks more like redistribution via market.

Re: Why Germans won’t heat their homes even with free electricity?

#360

Post by wrp »

Throwaway984332 wrote: post #341
systemtest wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is correct, but a heat pump requires a big unit placed outside the home that makes noise. Given our lack of space, closely grouped homes and apartment buildings, that is a challenge. Also a heat pump is not able to heat the water to 70 degrees, which is why you need to isolate your home even more for it to work. Electric resistance heat is inefficient but it's a plug-and-play replacement solution for gas heaters…

"but a heat pump requires a big unit placed outside the home that makes noise." Old ones maybe. We've installed a Mitsubishi mini-split that can heat a 1900 sq ft. mediocrely insulated home in Appalachia (this morning was -6C). Never mind, the indoor spits ( As to footprint, the compressor is tall and wide (about 1m). But it's only 25 cm thick, so it doesn't take much room at all along the wall. Really, Europe has no…

> Old ones maybe.

Even the "quiet" new ones cause a problem when placed in the confined area between buildings[1]. It projects low frequency noise into the neighboring structure. Very hard to deal with. You still need to be careful with placement[2].

[1] http://www.quiet.org/readings/a-c_sound%20advice.htm

[2] https://www.eugene-or.gov/DocumentCenter/View/17196/Neighbor... (PDF)

Post reply on HN