I love renewables, but the problem with solar is the lack of inertia (literally). Big spinning masses like steam turbines have an easier time staying on network frequency. Wind turbines better than solar of course so I hope we continue to have diversity there.
Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time
91–100 of 341 posts
Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time
#92Some good data on this topic: https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions
Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time
#93Thank goodness the energy policy of the US is being dictated by a single, highly intelligent man that isn't falling for the clean energy hoax, a man who consistently puts the interests of the people over his own interests. It's sad that the rest of the world is falling for this scam.
Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time
#94I'm confused by the US conservatives' full court press for fossil fuels and against wind/solar. I believe it's mostly about protecting existing money/power structures, but I don't really know. I mean, where does all Trump's energy on this topic come from? Is it owning the libs or courting donors or the Heritage Foundation/AEI? If it's really about protecting fossil fuel wealth, is there a long-term plan or are they j…
I think this is more about tribalism than conservatism. There's nothing inherently "conservative" about opposing renewable energy.
The political movement that's currently leading the Republican party shouldn't be understood as "conservative". At least, certainly not in terms of the conservative values of respect for the rule of law, traditional mores and institutions, or personal integrity. The populist energy that passes for "conservative" is reactionary and much more concerned with scoring points on social media than governing sensibly.
To be fair, the populist left is also ascendant with its own set of bad ideas.
Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no physics reason of course, but not using the natural river source for cooling like this further hurts the economics of nuclear power, which is already it's primary weakness. Similarly, all industrial processes of heat rejection, including data centers, could use closed cycle cooling, but they don't, because it's more expensive to install and operate.
> the economics of nuclear power, which is already it's primary weakness. That affects ~0.5% of the yearly production in France, it's not a "primary weakness", it's the opposite, it's so low of a problem that the state simply doesn't care enough to fix it.
They are saying economics is the primary weakness i.e. nuclear costs more than renewables even if you don't have fancy cooling methods that would increase the cost further.
Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
The German political decision to not join with Russia and invade Ukraine (via Poland?). Just because it was the right decision doesn't mean there are not downsides.
Accepting potential consequences is not the same as oneself cutting things off. Germany did not seek to end supplies then and there. Edit: there was never any chance of Germany invading Ukraine then/joining Russia on any invasion.
It doesn't matter what they wanted to do. What matters is what happened. As a result of their actions they got cut off. If Germany had invaded Ukraine (via Poland?) the gas might still be on. Of course we don't know that because other countries would likely take offense to that action and I'm not willing to predict how the world would change if they had. (I can't even imagine change would cause them to be willing to invade in the first place, much less how everyone else would respond.)
Politics often are about the unintended consequences. Often they are also unforeseen.
Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time
#97I love renewables, but the problem with solar is the lack of inertia (literally). Big spinning masses like steam turbines have an easier time staying on network frequency. Wind turbines better than solar of course so I hope we continue to have diversity there.
Thankfully this is one of the easiest limitations to get around technically. Grid forming inverters and inertia markets make this pretty straightforward to solve IMO. Storage is the key thing we need to solve
Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
But so is German industry - every day in the news either insolvency or workforce reduction and moving production to Eastern Europe - main reason often stated "expensive Energy". I wonder what are the stats for industrial production in 2025 or total energy consumption in Germany?
You make it sound like there is a causality here. I would be careful. German GDP is declining for other reasons, not for their commitment to renwables. Also, by all measures, living in Germany still means you get one of the most comfortable, secure and free lives on earth. I wouldn't give up on Germany so fast. They still know how to work and often work, even if there is no reason to work (i.e looking at their curren…
Arguably Sweden (and possibly the other Nordic countries too) are even better places to live (or at least equally good). Well, as long as you can stand the climate and the lack of sun in the winter.
We have right to roam in nature here, which is quite rare across the world (and even compared to the few other countries that have something similar, the Swedish variant is stronger). I wouldn't trade that for anything.
Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time
#99Cheap, renewable energy offers a competitive advantage to manufacturing and AI.
This undoubtedly explains why the current US administration is openly hostile to it.
Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
Germany cut off Russian gas? Gazprom suspended supply indefinitely via NS1 before it was destroyed.
Canada sanctioned the repaired gas turbines needed to operate NS1. They flip flopped on their decision some time later though. This was spun as a Russian decision, but western countries were clearly trying to force Germany's hand.
And then Russia refused to install the turbine, proving it was a ploy all along. Like the maintenance in the first place. Which is why they acquired gas storage in Germany, then ran it low timed with their illegal war of aggression. This is a theme of course; Russia invented another gas crisis every few years with Ukraine. It should have been a warning sign when they settled them by taking payment in the form of Soviet-era cruise missiles.
The gas was never cheap, either; apart from the money spent now to restrain the military buildup and invasion it financed, even at the height of supplies it was much higher price than China is paying, a price sustained by Russia using military force and more to restrain other (Asian) countries from supplying to Europe.
(This was obvious to everyone, right? A single majority supplier nation state charging a cheap price out of the kindness of their heart? No, of course not; neither cheap nor kind. It was a monopoly, built on blood.)