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

Germany solar power output jumps to record highs

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 108 posts

Re: Germany solar power output jumps to record highs

#61

Post by dailykoder »

roenxi wrote: post #54

The trade-offs here don't seem favourable. Gemany's per-capita energy production has been dropping [0] and I'm going to be waiting to see what their industrial manufacturing does but I doubt we're going to see China-style explosive growth out of them any time soon. We've got a very persistent trend across all these ideology-before-prosperity western countries where their energy policy is proving to be a disaster. We'…

>We're getting literal de-growth of energy

What do you mean by that and why is it bad? Do you mean that we save energy and need less? That doesn't sound bad tbh.

Re: Germany solar power output jumps to record highs

#62

Post by piva00 »

dindobre wrote: post #39
OKRainbowKid wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prices have been going down for about a year, and are now lower than before the war, despite massive shocks and transformations. Also, if you care about low prices, nuclear is among the worst options.

Would love to understand more about your last statement.

Nuclear reactors take a long, long time to recoup the investments. During that time the cost of electricity generated by them is quite high compared to renewable sources like wind and solar.

This compounds when cheaper sources are being added to the grid, pushing prices down and making nuclear even less viable economically. For nukes to work, economically speaking, electricity prices need to be stable over a long period of time or they become perpetually in the red.

For this to work you can't have liberalised electricity markets, you need the government take the brunt of the risk of new nukes when it's economically not viable and have a design that spans a lifetime of 50-70 years so future generations can benefit from the lower cost after the capital costs are paid off.

Re: Germany solar power output jumps to record highs

#63

Post by j-pb »

kgabis wrote: post #50
j-pb wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at this chart, how has nuclear reached its target? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#... Nuclear has less capacity than solar. Nuclear has less capacity than on-shore wind. Nuclear is currently 3x as expensive as on-shore wind. Nuclear is currently 2x as expensive as solar. France spend the last 70 years building low-CO2 energy reactors. Nobody is disputing that this is a great thing…

Installed capacity is a silly metric when you want to compare intermittent energy sources like solar and wind with baseload ones like nuclear.

The price for solar/wind + energy storage is still cheaper than nuclear tho.

Re: Germany solar power output jumps to record highs

#64

Post by fp64 »

knallfrosch wrote: post #26
fp64 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? I would expect it to be comparatively chill, as it should be running mostly constant and reliable?

Unless, of course, you have to shut down your nuclear plant because your cooling water is too warm during the summer months: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/warming-rivers-threa...

The articles says the hot water _threatened_ a shut down. Did it actually happen to shut down because of the water temperature in the summer month in 2022, or was this FUD?

Re: Germany solar power output jumps to record highs

#65

Post by Kuinox »

j-pb wrote: post #32
Kuinox wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your solar doesn't work well in winter, and in night. At this point it's more important to build energy storage to drive down the CO2. > If we manage to hold off regressive forces that are trying to derail the current trajectory with whataboutism of nuclear Nuclear already reached the target. It's not some "whataboutism".

Looking at this chart, how has nuclear reached its target? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#... Nuclear has less capacity than solar. Nuclear has less capacity than on-shore wind. Nuclear is currently 3x as expensive as on-shore wind. Nuclear is currently 2x as expensive as solar. France spend the last 70 years building low-CO2 energy reactors. Nobody is disputing that this is a great thing…

This is the installed capacity.

The capacity factor in winter for solar is below 10%. Nuclear is typically at more than 90% in winter.

The target we are speaking is CO2 emitted, it already reached the "target" in france, with less than 60gCO2/kwh to provide electricity the whole year, to the whole grid.

> but that doesn't mean that it is the right technology for other nations to go with now

you propose something that is not feasible with the current technology.

Reports indicate countries should build a lots of clean energy source, as fast as possible, including nuclear, solar, wind, to use these clean energy source and replace fossil energy, to limit global warming

Right now, France doesn't do that fast enough (not enough investment in nuclear, and renewable), and Germany is headed to the opposite direction (need of fossil fuel to produce in renewable down-time).

Re: Germany solar power output jumps to record highs

#66

Post by dindobre »

piva00 wrote: post #62
dindobre wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would love to understand more about your last statement.

Nuclear reactors take a long, long time to recoup the investments. During that time the cost of electricity generated by them is quite high compared to renewable sources like wind and solar. This compounds when cheaper sources are being added to the grid, pushing prices down and making nuclear even less viable economically. For nukes to work, economically speaking, electricity prices need to be stable over a long per…

I see, makes sense.

Re: Germany solar power output jumps to record highs

#67

Post by Kuinox »

j-pb wrote: post #63
kgabis wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Installed capacity is a silly metric when you want to compare intermittent energy sources like solar and wind with baseload ones like nuclear.

The price for solar/wind + energy storage is still cheaper than nuclear tho.

This doesn't take into account the cost associated with storing the energy, or having alternate energy source to fill in the gaps.

Re: Germany solar power output jumps to record highs

#68

Post by Kuinox »

martin_a wrote: post #48
njarboe wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or if they had gone full nuclear like France. From the article: "While Germany's power carbon intensity vastly exceeds the roughly 45g of CO2/KWh of France's nuclear-heavy system, the 166g reading at 1 p.m. on May 13 was below the 170g of CO2/KWh emitted during the same hour in Britain, which on an annual basis has a far lower carbon intensity than Germany."

> full nuclear like France The France that regularly has to shut down its reactors in the summer because there's no water for cooling left? Great idea!

What you wrote is propaganda and not true, are you aware about that?

Re: Germany solar power output jumps to record highs

#69

Post by [deleted] »

roenxi wrote: post #54

The trade-offs here don't seem favourable. Gemany's per-capita energy production has been dropping [0] and I'm going to be waiting to see what their industrial manufacturing does but I doubt we're going to see China-style explosive growth out of them any time soon. We've got a very persistent trend across all these ideology-before-prosperity western countries where their energy policy is proving to be a disaster. We'…

[deleted]

Re: Germany solar power output jumps to record highs

#70

Post by j-pb »

Kuinox wrote: post #65
j-pb wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at this chart, how has nuclear reached its target? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#... Nuclear has less capacity than solar. Nuclear has less capacity than on-shore wind. Nuclear is currently 3x as expensive as on-shore wind. Nuclear is currently 2x as expensive as solar. France spend the last 70 years building low-CO2 energy reactors. Nobody is disputing that this is a great thing…

This is the installed capacity. The capacity factor in winter for solar is below 10%. Nuclear is typically at more than 90% in winter. The target we are speaking is CO2 emitted, it already reached the "target" in france, with less than 60gCO2/kwh to provide electricity the whole year, to the whole grid. > but that doesn't mean that it is the right technology for other nations to go with now you propose something that…

This is the energy generated.

Every euro spend on nuclear is a euro not spend on something that's giving you 2-3x as much energy generated.

Rewewables have been called "infeasible" at 5%, at 25% at 50%, now we're at 60%. I'm prette sure you'll yell "infeasible" even if we're running at 100%...

Post reply on HN