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

Germany's Energy Catastrophe

quillette.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 171 posts

Re: Germany's Energy Catastrophe

#111

Post by rich_sasha »

BurningPenguin wrote: post #110

Yet another one, who thinks it's about electricity. We don't have much of a problem with that, since gas only makes up about 10% of the energy mix. About 75% of all households in Germany use gas and oil for heating. Your magic nuclear reactor won't change that. Switching those things takes some time, and it won't be done until next winter. All companies specialized in that are already booked out and there is a shorta…

They are quite fungible for heating.

I don't know how prices compare, but UK is on a big drive to replace gas boilers in private homes with heat pumps. The main obstacle is actually poor general building standards and insulation. I believe German standards are quite a bit higher. Basically, the peak temperature produced by air-source heat pumps is lower than that from a boiler, so without better insulation they don't work so well (or something like that).

Re: Germany's Energy Catastrophe

#112

Post by dispat0r »

dividedbyzero wrote: post #96
epups wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's amazing how many well intentioned people cannot grasp this very simple point. There is no way to run a grid solely on solar and wind. Therefore the choice isn't between those and nuclear, it's between nuclear and coal/gas.

And now the fourth largest economy in the world with a huge and extremely capable engineering base is committed to finding a way. Given that storage and other supporting tech for renewables has so far received hardly any serious funding at all, I think it's quite realistic to expect a success story there. Just consider what the many billions invested into fracking tech did to the US accessible gas reserves, and that…

Germany will just no longer have the fourth-largest economy in the world. There is no way to substitute gas short term, long term you can replace it with electric alternatives. But these electric alternatives do not run on a grid with just wind and solar. I live in Germany and I have no hope. Our heating bills for the next winter can already exceed $900 per month for a 4-person household, electric costs also at $200 per month. The whole economy will just collapse.

Re: Germany's Energy Catastrophe

#113

Post by llampx »

dividedbyzero wrote: post #96
epups wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's amazing how many well intentioned people cannot grasp this very simple point. There is no way to run a grid solely on solar and wind. Therefore the choice isn't between those and nuclear, it's between nuclear and coal/gas.

And now the fourth largest economy in the world with a huge and extremely capable engineering base is committed to finding a way. Given that storage and other supporting tech for renewables has so far received hardly any serious funding at all, I think it's quite realistic to expect a success story there. Just consider what the many billions invested into fracking tech did to the US accessible gas reserves, and that…

Germany has been funding renewables for decades now. Even then, they are not competitive with China, for solar panels for example.

Re: Germany's Energy Catastrophe

#114

Post by wewxjfq »

dispat0r wrote: post #101
locallost wrote: post #6

Germany proceeded with their "nuclear exit" in 2011. Had they gone the other way and all in on nuclear, they would be in the same situation as they are today as planning and building nuclear plants takes a lot longer than 10 years. Actually they would be way worse because instead of having 50% of electricity coming from renewables, they would still have 45% of it coming from coal, instead of 25% in 2020 (did not chec…

You are right, Germany should have build new nuclear plants in 2000. The renewables make the German energy grid unstable and expensive, we have the highest power cost in the world currently with no end in sight, also no storage for the renewables. You can build nuclear power plants in about 10 Years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barakah_nuclear_power_plant Uranium is not only exported by Russia.

Germany has high consumer electricity prices because of taxation. It's only slightly above EU average if you ignore taxes. And France, the nuclear energy utopia, is only slightly below EU average. And this ignores potential state subsidies, artificial price caps and regulation by the French government, and that Germany uses 1/4 of the electricity price to modernize the grid.

Re: Germany's Energy Catastrophe

#115

Post by BurningPenguin »

rich_sasha wrote: post #111
BurningPenguin wrote: post #110

Yet another one, who thinks it's about electricity. We don't have much of a problem with that, since gas only makes up about 10% of the energy mix. About 75% of all households in Germany use gas and oil for heating. Your magic nuclear reactor won't change that. Switching those things takes some time, and it won't be done until next winter. All companies specialized in that are already booked out and there is a shorta…

They are quite fungible for heating. I don't know how prices compare, but UK is on a big drive to replace gas boilers in private homes with heat pumps. The main obstacle is actually poor general building standards and insulation. I believe German standards are quite a bit higher. Basically, the peak temperature produced by air-source heat pumps is lower than that from a boiler, so without better insulation they don't…

Idk what the exact differences are. I only know, that newer buildings are already required to have proper insulation, so for those that are built or (properly) renovated in, idk maybe the last 20 years or so, should be fine. But we also have plenty of older buildings, that need some work. That's probably also one of the reasons why many people go for wood pellets to replace the gas heater. Add to that all the really old buildings, that can't be renovated due to urban heritage protections.

But as said, all the companies are booked out and parts aren't available fast enough, thanks to outsourcing to China...

Re: Germany's Energy Catastrophe

#116

Post by llampx »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #35

Of course the flip side is that Germany is going cold turkey on coal and gas in the next few years. Once that process is completed, it will have a huge head start on other countries looking to slowly transition to being carbon neutral. That's actually a good thing. Short term it's disruptive for sure but it is already leading to huge public spending. Which of course also is the classic recipe to mitigate the risks of…

Its cute that you think this all boils (sic) down to cold showers. Typical out-of-touch mentality. Maybe a few thousand elderly and children dying in unheated 70s apartments will wake you up better than cold showers in the morning.

Re: Germany's Energy Catastrophe

#117

Post by ben_w »

dividedbyzero wrote: post #99
epups wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no large scale hydrogen storage facility that could take even 1% of German's energy needs.

Yet.

Indeed. If the annual natural gas use of all of Germany was represented as liquid hydrogen, it would be a ~700m cube.

A year is probably more than is needed, but I don't know how low storage can go before it causes problems. If I guess a week is sufficient then every million German residents need a 43m cube.

This isn't unbuildable if there is sufficient political will.

Re: Germany's Energy Catastrophe

#118

Post by BenoitP »

locallost wrote: post #6

Germany proceeded with their "nuclear exit" in 2011. Had they gone the other way and all in on nuclear, they would be in the same situation as they are today as planning and building nuclear plants takes a lot longer than 10 years. Actually they would be way worse because instead of having 50% of electricity coming from renewables, they would still have 45% of it coming from coal, instead of 25% in 2020 (did not chec…

If Germany had kept its nuclear plants, it would not be wasting currently 5GW of gas for electricity (and burning much less lignite coal as well):

https://app.electricitymaps.com/zone/DE

> one of the largest exporters of uranium to the EU is... Russia

It is a common false perception that it is a problem, very often pushed by fake news outlets. You might be a victim. Russia produces about 15% of the world's uranium [1], according to UNECE.

[1] https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2022-04/LCA_3_FINAL%20...

Re: Germany's Energy Catastrophe

#119

Post by flohofwoe »

LunaSea wrote: post #94
VaxWithSex wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They actually didn't. New plants only qualify as "green investments" if and only if they can be used to burn electrolyzed hydrogen in the future.

Which also isn't "green" in any shape or form.

It's as "green" as the electricity used for the hydrogen production. The idea is to use hydrogen as energy storage, produced from surplus wind and solar energy.

Re: Germany's Energy Catastrophe

#120

Post by ben_w »

dispat0r wrote: post #112
dividedbyzero wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And now the fourth largest economy in the world with a huge and extremely capable engineering base is committed to finding a way. Given that storage and other supporting tech for renewables has so far received hardly any serious funding at all, I think it's quite realistic to expect a success story there. Just consider what the many billions invested into fracking tech did to the US accessible gas reserves, and that…

Germany will just no longer have the fourth-largest economy in the world. There is no way to substitute gas short term, long term you can replace it with electric alternatives. But these electric alternatives do not run on a grid with just wind and solar. I live in Germany and I have no hope. Our heating bills for the next winter can already exceed $900 per month for a 4-person household, electric costs also at $200…

I expect Germany to import the smallest amount of natural gas that the government can be confident will prevent economic collapse.

I also expect this quantity to be much lower than it would've been last year, as I also expect significant effort to be put into both improvements (e.g. home insulation) and alternatives (e.g. renewables).

Post reply on HN