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

Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time

intellinews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 341 posts

Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time

#261

Post by alpineman »

sajithdilshan wrote: post #256
alpineman wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plants don't feel pain as pain is generally understood. They don't have neural circuits, nociceptors, or brains. We have all those things. Cats, cows, and pigs have all those things. That said, plants do have defense mechanisms, of course. But that's not the same thing as pain or emotions. In any case, generally strawberry pickers aren't traumatised in the same way as slaughterhouse workers. Even if one were to view…

> Plants don't feel pain as pain is generally understood. we don't know that for sure. just to be safe don't eat plants or plant based products too. Eat dirt, that's 100% safe and also feed your children dirt too. The evolution would do the rest and rid your genes from the gene pool

Absurd example, dig at my kids, no counterargument. That's the online equivalent of conceding the argument. Nice one.

Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time

#262

Post by netsharc »

igl wrote: post #260
inigyou wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could've even sold weapons to Russia. There wouldn't have ever been German soldiers in Ukraine though.

Germany is in no position to go against the USA's geopolitical interests. Sure, they do trade shenanigans sometimes, like with Russian gas, but the relationship with Russia was pretty good before Putin decided to hold power endlessly - he even gave a speech (in German) in the parliament. But in the end of the day, those times are over; only extremist parties are pro-Russian, and Germany still has the 2nd largest US A…

But which USA are you talking about? Currently it is ruled by such an extremist party where some members declared love for Putin (and others are cowardly just "following orders" because they like their power and paycheck).

The former Warsaw Pact countries are aware capitulating to Putin would mean they're next, so they're vocal against EU surrender. Further, if East Europe gets threatened, West Europe knows it'll have a mother of a refugee crisis - even if Ukraine falls they'll have one.

Anyway, that's all to say currently USA's geopolitical interest seems to be "Trump Tower Moscow", and Germany is not going to go along with that.

Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time

#263

Post by leonidasrup »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #95
realusername wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

For renewables (solar, wind) to work reliably you have to provide on-demand backup, invest in energy storage systems and increase investments in electric as renewables are often far away from consumers. (German offshore wind in north, major industrial consumers in south). So direct comparison of isolated costs of renewables and nuclear is misleading. You have compare the whole system.

Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time

#264

Post by leonidasrup »

patall wrote: post #28
throw0101d wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imagine how much better carbon emissions would be in Germany if they hadn't dismantled nuclear! Germany has 15.4 GW of hard coal generation, and 14.7 GW of lignite, for a total of 30.1 GW: * https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-c... In 2010, before the shutdowns started, it had 21.5 GW of nuclear. So if all the other rollouts (renewables, etc ) had stayed the same, but the shutdown of nuclear…

And Europe would be in even bigger black-out trouble right now as half of those 20 GW of nuclear power would not be running due to missing cooling water, just like is the case in the other European countries. The german green part certainly isn't perfect, but they had a plan. A plan that included far more renewable energies than currently build. The ones that orchestrated the ultimate end of nuclear energy while shut…

If look up the original plan from 1980s, you will see that the German Green idea was to replace nuclear power and oil with renewable and coal and natural gas. Climate change was not very important, the most important was to remove nuclear power. (The founding idea of German Greens, as was for many anti-nuclear groups, was that by removing nuclear power they will remove the danger of nuclear weapons.)

Energie-Wende: Wachstum und Wohlstand ohne Erdöl und Uran [Energy transition: growth and prosperity without petroleum and uranium]

https://web.archive.org/web/20160914043645/http://www2.hu-be...

Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time

#265

Post by purerandomness »

realusername wrote: post #259
Krasnol wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany isn't setting a fixed end consumer price and hides all that happens behind the tax-cushioned curtains.

They absolutely do, they are debating to remove it or not at the moment. https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/government-agrees-phase...

You didn't read your own article. They're debating to end feed-in tariffs for solar panel electricity.

Germany does not have set electricity prices like France does with the EDF.

Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time

#266

Post by perrygeo »

mikaeluman wrote: post #137

The headline should state this is about electricity generation. If you compare e.g. with a country like Sweden or France they have been free from fossil fuels for electricity since the build outs in the 70s-80s. Also Germany is an importer of significant electricity (e.g nuclear power from France). But due to a stagnant economy and no increase in electricity demand - yes, I guess this milestone is now passed...

True. Less than 40% of the world's fossil fuel energy goes to generating electricity. The rest goes to transportation, industrial processes, material feedstock, and direct heating - which are not accounted for in this metric!

"Renewable alternatives cover half of 40% of fossil fuel demand" would be more accurate. Still a win, but it's not "overtaking fossil fuels" by any definition.

Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time

#267

Post by danans »

bluGill wrote: post #79
SoftTalker wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's free to collect (solar) then efficiency matters a lot less.

It isn't just the cost to collect, it is also the cost to store. Heat is easy and safe to store at just above room temperature in rocks - but you need a lot of rocks. Just to heat my house for a few days would need tons of rock at temperatures I'd allow in my house (I have kids and so I worry they will open the rock container and get burnt). Rocks are not free. You can also use water for storage, but again you have t…

> Just to heat my house for a few days would need tons of rock at temperatures I'd allow in my house (I have kids and so I worry they will open the rock container and get burnt). Rocks are not free

Sand/rock heat storage is for industrial and utility scale application, not your house.

> You can also use water for storage, but again you have the issue needing a tank (and water is a drowning hazard, plus the worry about leaks...)

Tank heat pump water heaters are available and can already do load shifting on a daily basis (using off peak cheaper and cleaner electricity). I have one and it works great, and I guarantee it isn't a drowning hazard.

There are versions of these systems that can store enough heat to heat a house, not just provide hot water at the tap.

Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time

#268

Post by inigyou »

igl wrote: post #260
inigyou wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could've even sold weapons to Russia. There wouldn't have ever been German soldiers in Ukraine though.

Germany is in no position to go against the USA's geopolitical interests. Sure, they do trade shenanigans sometimes, like with Russian gas, but the relationship with Russia was pretty good before Putin decided to hold power endlessly - he even gave a speech (in German) in the parliament. But in the end of the day, those times are over; only extremist parties are pro-Russian, and Germany still has the 2nd largest US A…

The USA is currently supporting Russia more than Ukraine, and Germany is disobeying.

Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time

#269

Post by tialaramex »

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #81

I'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…

Not so much this specific structure as the structure at all, the ownership of energy resources.

In a country like the US somebody owns the coal. They didn't make that coal, but we decided they can own it anyway, and so even though they didn't make the coal and it's never going to be replaced, just destroyed for all time, they get to capture the economic value from that.

Nobody, even in the US, owns the wind, and a wind farm doesn't capture some finite wind and gradually use it up, there's more wind where that came from, essentially forever.

Solar is even worse, because it works at a tiny scale. Owning your own wind turbine almost never makes sense but owning some solar panels makes sense for most owner-occupiers, especially if you live outside a city.

I don't think Trump would care whether the guy handing him an "America's Best Ever President" trophy and a $5Bn check is a Californian Sunlight Baron or a Wyoming Coal Baron, but the problem is that there can't be a Californian Sunlight Baron. You can't own California's sunlight, that's not a thing.

Re: Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in Germany for the first time

#270

Post by themaninthedark »

hamper653 wrote: post #236
themaninthedark wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your solution to: >German economy is rocketing to the bottom, their industry is dying with thousands of layoffs, closing factories, and complains on energy prices and they can't even maintain their rail and road networks for the first time since forever. Except for downplaying the problems or saying they have to suffer? Mine is re-shore all industry so that products are made according to environmental, health…

> Mine is re-shore all industry "The bourgeoisie has through its exploitation of the world market given a cosmopolitan character to production and consumption in every country. To the great chagrin of Reactionists, it has drawn from under the feet of industry the national ground on which it stood. All old-established national industries have been destroyed or are daily being destroyed. They are dislodged by new indus…

Not sure exactly what the point of quoting Marx at me was supposed to be...

People need jobs and a functioning economy to live.

This thread started with the GGGP talking about the decline of Germany's economy contrasted by the meteoric rise of China.

GGP states it's capitalism's fault.

GP says even if Germany disappeared from the face of the earth the current emission levels wouldn't even notice.

My parent asked why GP was downplaying or ignoring and asked for a solution.

I provided one.

Quoting Marx is not a solution. One of the current largest polluting countries was founded in part according to Marxist ideas. Russia under the Soviets gave us Chernobyl and Lake Karachay they also continued to hunt whales far in excess of their international agreements well into the 1980s.

"As others exited the whaling industry, the Soviets, alongside the Japanese, helped reduce the world’s whales from imperiled to nearly extinct, doing the hard work of an annihilation that flew in the face of economic rationality. The Soviets were able to do this in part because of a planned economy that resisted market forces."

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/06/history-of-sovie...

So no, your economic ideology has nothing to do with your ecological ideology.

What is your solution?

Post reply on HN