Live data from Hacker News

Germany Achieves Record 57.7% Renewable Energy Share for First Half of 2023

ise.fraunhofer.de

401–410 of 430 posts

Re: Germany Achieves Record 57.7% Renewable Energy Share for First Half of 2023

#401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The country people should be complaining about is Poland. It's the worst emitter of co2 in Europe I don't have the numbers with me so I cannot check this right now, but I believe your comment to be incorrect. Germany must have more CO2 emissions than Poland from Coal alone since Germany is the largest user of energy from coal burning in Europe.

Sorry, no. Check the data.

I looked up some data on this now, and Germany is ahead of Poland in CO2 emissions from Coal: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1014423/co2-emissions-fr...

There is also a page on the German Wikipedia showing CO2 emissions from Gas, Coal and Oil burning and again Germany is significantly above Poland: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_gr%C3%B6%C3%9Ften_Ko...

Re: Germany Achieves Record 57.7% Renewable Energy Share for First Half of 2023

#402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no difference between building plants and producing the vast majority of your electricity from coal for the next 15 years. The latter is the consequence of the former.

You seem to imply that building nuclear takes forever. This is wrong.

There is no need to imply when we have data. Building nuclear takes forever.

Re: Germany Achieves Record 57.7% Renewable Energy Share for First Half of 2023

#403
post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But then you would have to claim that the mainstream parties of many, if not most, countries are "right extremist". Japan would probably count as significantly more "extremist" than the AfD.

I would call all parties right extremists who deny or relativate the Holocaust, consider shooting people at the borders and so on.

That is a gross misrepresentation of that parties position.

Re: Germany Achieves Record 57.7% Renewable Energy Share for First Half of 2023

#404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to imply that building nuclear takes forever. This is wrong.

There is no need to imply when we have data. Building nuclear takes forever.

Yes, because of government regulations that force safety to a much, much higher standards than those for coal.

Re: Germany Achieves Record 57.7% Renewable Energy Share for First Half of 2023

#405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no need to imply when we have data. Building nuclear takes forever.

Yes, because of government regulations that force safety to a much, much higher standards than those for coal.

So at least we agree it takes forever and is thus harmful when it comes to emissions.

Re: Germany Achieves Record 57.7% Renewable Energy Share for First Half of 2023

#406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, because of government regulations that force safety to a much, much higher standards than those for coal.

So at least we agree it takes forever and is thus harmful when it comes to emissions.

Harmful are stupid regulations helping coal, and also people who don't get that damage from coal is so strong that even ancient nuclear reactors are safer, including Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Re: Germany Achieves Record 57.7% Renewable Energy Share for First Half of 2023

#407
post #334
post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a very good article on HN about how nuclear reactors only seem to have gotten harder to plan and execute in Western countries since the 1980s due to ever-increasing regulations. Building a nuclear reactor doesn't have to take decades.

But regulations are what makes nuclear energy supposedly safe. Faster build times aren't worth it if we risk nuclear meltdowns.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-risk_bias

Re: Germany Achieves Record 57.7% Renewable Energy Share for First Half of 2023

#408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So at least we agree it takes forever and is thus harmful when it comes to emissions.

Harmful are stupid regulations helping coal, and also people who don't get that damage from coal is so strong that even ancient nuclear reactors are safer, including Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Whataboutism.

Nuclear's long build times help coal plants stay open and are thus bad for emissions. Here [1] an article about Poland deciding to build nuclear plants FOUR YEARS AGO. During that time they did not displace a single molecule of co2 from their worst in Europe electricity production. The construction didn't even begin yet, and when it does it will again take years in the best case. If it takes as much as it did in other European countries recently, we are talking about 20 years easily.

Those that praise this strategy are either naive, misinformed, or funded by the nuclear lobby.

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-18/poland-mo...

Re: Germany Achieves Record 57.7% Renewable Energy Share for First Half of 2023

#409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, no. Check the data.

I looked up some data on this now, and Germany is ahead of Poland in CO2 emissions from Coal: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1014423/co2-emissions-fr... There is also a page on the German Wikipedia showing CO2 emissions from Gas, Coal and Oil burning and again Germany is significantly above Poland: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_gr%C3%B6%C3%9Ften_Ko...

Those are absolute numbers. Germany's population is more than twice that of Poland.

Germany's electricity production is 25% coal where as it is over 70% coal in Poland.

Re: Germany Achieves Record 57.7% Renewable Energy Share for First Half of 2023

#410
post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But regulations are what makes nuclear energy supposedly safe. Faster build times aren't worth it if we risk nuclear meltdowns.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-risk_bias

It's easy to posit yourself as taking the "necessary risks", but you haven't demonstrated that:

- nuclear energy is the only way to fend off the climate crisis

- unsafe nuclear energy is the only way for nuclear energy to fend off the climate crisis

- the risk of unsafe nuclear energy is lower than the risk of the climate crisis

Until you do that I will prefer the lower risk option.

Post reply on HN