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

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

ise.fraunhofer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 430 posts

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

#411

Post by maigret »

roenxi wrote: post #398
maigret wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people have a hard time understanding the concept of efficiency.

Order of magnitude, what specific efficiencies do you think are causing this? because I think that is just completely silly. Efficiencies will trigger Jevons' paradox and result in energy use rising. What we're seeing in these graphs is a squeeze as Asian nations outcomplete the developed countries combined with a series of policy failures in the West as we choke out our own energy and industrial bases.

> what specific efficiencies do you think are causing this

Depends of the place... Improvements in computers & electronics (new TV uses less than half what the old one used 10 y ago), new transportation technologies, better building insulation, diminishing meat consumption... The high energy prices and regulations are two good pushers on that.

> Efficiencies will trigger Jevons' paradox and result in energy use rising

Only when the prices follow the efficiency. Also, this statement has not applied for electricity in the EU for the last 20 years despite plenty of growth https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...

Overall, how do you propose to fight climate change in the coming 5 to 10 years?

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

#412

Post by fsflover »

Timon3 wrote: post #410
fsflover wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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

This is the only practically infinite source of CO2-free energy not relying on weather, geographical position or large area. See also:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26603464

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26673987

> - unsafe nuclear energy

It is safer than almost all other sources (taking into account Chernobyl and Fukushima): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_plant#/media/Fil...

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

The climate catastrophe is considered obviously very dangerous by all scientific organizations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_climate_change

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

#413

Post by the_mitsuhiko »

locallost wrote: post #409
the_mitsuhiko wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sure, but we are not talking about per capita co2 emissions but the worst emitter, and that is Germany and not Poland. The world does not care about per capita anything, it cares about absolutes.

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

#414

Post by fsflover »

locallost wrote: post #408
fsflover wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Here [1] an article about Poland deciding to build nuclear plants FOUR YEARS AGO.

Cherry picking. Other countries build nuclear reactors just fine if they want. See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36333904

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

#415

Post by roenxi »

maigret wrote: post #411
roenxi wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Order of magnitude, what specific efficiencies do you think are causing this? because I think that is just completely silly. Efficiencies will trigger Jevons' paradox and result in energy use rising. What we're seeing in these graphs is a squeeze as Asian nations outcomplete the developed countries combined with a series of policy failures in the West as we choke out our own energy and industrial bases.

> what specific efficiencies do you think are causing this Depends of the place... Improvements in computers & electronics (new TV uses less than half what the old one used 10 y ago), new transportation technologies, better building insulation, diminishing meat consumption... The high energy prices and regulations are two good pushers on that. > Efficiencies will trigger Jevons' paradox and result in energy use risin…

> Improvements in computers & electronics...

Picking on this as the most obvious example - the first thing you mention is consumer electronics efficiencies as being linked to a reduced energy use in the last 10 years, but then you linked an article showing that German per-household electricity use rose in the last 10 years. It is a challenging to connect those things.

The issue you have here is you're pulling ideas out of your hat with no evidence. If you do some order of magnitude estimates and have any statistics on hand, you're going to find that you're just wrong. The evidence points to Europe being midway though a deindustralisation and likely going through a big drop in living standards as industrial capital starts to decay.

Their energy policies are likely to be somewhere between shattering the living standards of the poor in Europe through to plain old catastrophic as the consequences of relying on Russian gas and Chinese manufacturing start to bite.

> Overall, how do you propose to fight climate change in the coming 5 to 10 years?

I don't. The Europeans are fighting climate change and their standard of living is starting to collapse. There are riots in France and war has come to the continent again. The Chinese embraced fossil fuels and got something like 40 years of peace and prosperity where their lifestyles improved a jaw dropping amount.

The people "fighting" climate change

(1) Achieved nothing.

(2) Are suffering for it.

If they'd gone all-in on prosperity in the 80s and tried to make nuclear reactors work, ironically they would have done more for climate change and for their own citizens. Unfortunately, the environmentalists carried that battle and now everyone gets to suffer.

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

#416

Post by iSnow »

looping__lui wrote: post #314
iSnow wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nowhere on p 25 can I find this. Maybe you mean p 27, and I don't get what argument you are trying to make. Yes, there would be more gas capacity, but for green gas.

“Green gas”. You mean Biogas? That isn’t really an option: https://www.capital.de/amp/wirtschaft-politik/kann-biogas-ru...

It's right in your own source that they are talking about hydrogen. Page 27

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

#417

Post by adrianN »

looping__lui wrote: post #395
adrianN wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's industry scale? We have the technology to burn hydrogen and we have megawatt-scale electrolysis. What else do you want?

Where do u get the hydrogen from and how do you transport it at the scale required is one of these “questions for starters”. Megawatt scale isn’t really gonna cut it - the largest one in Germany has 110 MW (?) so we would need almost 1000 of them to cover our need when the sun doesn’t shine or there aint no wind

You make it in one of the thousands of electrolyzers you build and transport it in the same way you transport natgas.

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

#418

Post by adrianN »

martinald wrote: post #396
adrianN wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, true. But it turned from a "we don't have enough of element XY on Earth to build that" to a "it sounds kind of expensive" problem. As it turns out people did the math already and building the hydrogen infrastructure is probably not prohibitively expensive, in fact it might turn out to be reasonably cheap. There is a tradeoff between overbuilding renewables, improving the grid, making the demand side more dynami…

Yes, but my point isn't so much it couldn't ever be done, it's that by the time you upgrade the grid massively, build the renewables, build the electrolyzers, build the hydrogen infrastructure and the infrastructure to convert it back to electricity, it's almost certainly way more expensive than already expensive nuclear to build.

The experts tend to disagree.

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

#419

Post by locallost »

fsflover wrote: post #414
locallost wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Here [1] an article about Poland deciding to build nuclear plants FOUR YEARS AGO. Cherry picking. Other countries build nuclear reactors just fine if they want. See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36333904

Except we were talking specifically about Poland for which you said you support what they do. Now that you know the facts do you still support prolonging the use of so much coal? In 4 years they've done nothing, and won't do anything for at least a decade. Germany's coal exit 2030 you called too slow. Will you reconsider?

France started building a prototype replacement in Flamanville for those reactors and with a bit of luck it might be finished this year. After 20 years of development.

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

#420

Post by locallost »

the_mitsuhiko wrote: post #413
locallost wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sure, but we are not talking about per capita co2 emissions but the worst emitter, and that is Germany and not Poland. The world does not care about per capita anything, it cares about absolutes.

So I guess the problem might be solved if Germany dissolves into 16 smaller countries, this will surely reduce its emissions drastically. I haven't thought of that brilliant angle of tackling the climate crisis, just reduce the size of countries.

Do you have other ideas? At this rate we might solve the problem within a couple hours.

Post reply on HN