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

A pretty visualisation of the European power grid (2022)

121gigawatts.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 205 posts

Re: A pretty visualisation of the European power grid (2022)

#171

Post by fransje26 »

fransje26 wrote: post #144
layer8 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany’s net power grid imports are less than 5% (17% imports vs. 12.5% exports in 24H1), despite having no active nuclear power plants anymore. Around 60% of their domestically generated power currently comes from renewables (up 8% from last year). I don’t think it’s abundantly clear.

Ah, the well loved trick of playing with statistics to make something look good. The current carbon intensity per KWh in Germany is 526g, vs 50g for France. The average yearly carbon intensity per KWh in Germany, is 354g. So, either the rest 40% of domestically generated power are hyper-polluting, or the other statistics don't hold up. Either way, with such a high carbon intensity, there is nothing to brag about. And…

Ah, and let's not forget the "issue" of zero solar & wind days, as happened at the beginning of the month, with 20 GW missing..

Re: A pretty visualisation of the European power grid (2022)

#172

Post by therealdrag0 »

poniko wrote: post #97
coreyp_1 wrote: post #21

I get irrationally angry when a map is skewed in this way and there is no way to change it. The more you zoom in, the worse the distortion is made to be. Even zooming all the way out does not eliminate the angular distortion. This took actual effort on some programmer's part! Who ever thought that this is a good idea?!? It's like those navigational mini maps (car or computer game) that won't keep north pointing up...…

Two fingers scroll on mobile.

I had to use three fingers on my iPhone.

Re: A pretty visualisation of the European power grid (2022)

#173

Post by RandomThoughts3 »

globular-toast wrote: post #130
RandomThoughts3 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn’t make sense. The goal is decarbonation, not arbitrary account. The sole reason to mix together things that don’t go together is making bad faith arguments like in this case.

If the goal is "decarbonation" then the only thing that matters is the bottom line. If nuclear truly leads to a lower net carbon output (which I'm sure it does, unless using nuclear power somehow causes people to heat their homes more or drive ICE vehicles more) then what are you worried about?

People are intentionally muddling the case to make France success looks less successful. I like how you pretend to be candid while actually making the situation worse. Always funny to observe.

Re: A pretty visualisation of the European power grid (2022)

#174

Post by hokkos »

gharlan wrote: post #99
hokkos wrote: post #76

My visualisation of physical flow between countries or zones, you can see the net flow with arrow of relative size and colors : https://energygraph.info/d/7dWs1mVVk/interconnect-physical-f...

This is really cool! What specific data source(s) are used in the wind turbine charge factors view?

ECMWF ERA5 meteo data, and PyPSA/atlite to convert it to charge factor, with OSM data for the turbine location.

Re: A pretty visualisation of the European power grid (2022)

#175

Post by moooo99 »

RandomThoughts3 wrote: post #173
globular-toast wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the goal is "decarbonation" then the only thing that matters is the bottom line. If nuclear truly leads to a lower net carbon output (which I'm sure it does, unless using nuclear power somehow causes people to heat their homes more or drive ICE vehicles more) then what are you worried about?

People are intentionally muddling the case to make France success looks less successful. I like how you pretend to be candid while actually making the situation worse. Always funny to observe.

> People are intentionally muddling the case to make France success looks less successful.

It’s just not true at all, lol. Even by this way more useful metric France is doing quite well, substantially better than Germany for example. People are using this metric because it’s just useful while electricity footprint is only useful when you’re talking about very specific scenarios (like, how long until a BEV emits less carbon than an ICE).

About 50% of the primary energy consumption in France is low emissions.

Re: A pretty visualisation of the European power grid (2022)

#176

Post by natmaka »

preisschild wrote: post #155
moooo99 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, France gets 70% of its energy from nuclear, not 40%. No, it gets 70% of its electricity from nuclear.

Yeah, France could invest a lot more into nuclear-heat usage directly (e.g. for district heating or providing process heat to factories) without needing to convert it into Electricity first.

France did invest into a new nuclear powerplant, and the result isn't enticing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_Nuclear_Power_Plan...

Re: A pretty visualisation of the European power grid (2022)

#177

Post by natmaka »

draven wrote: post #119
layer8 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany’s net power grid imports are less than 5% (17% imports vs. 12.5% exports in 24H1), despite having no active nuclear power plants anymore. Around 60% of their domestically generated power currently comes from renewables (up 8% from last year). I don’t think it’s abundantly clear.

CO2 equiv from https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/24h : France: 40g/kWh Germany 557g/kWh If the goal is decarbonation, using wind+solar is alright (renewables are a bigger part of the mix in Germany) but burning gas and lignite when there's no sun or wind is not.

In Germany the problem is coal (lignite): it remains a huge social and political 'asset'. Many jobs, low-priced electricity, no dependency towards fuel shipped by a foreign nation...

France switched to nuclear because at the time it didn't have any fossil fuel ( https://sites.google.com/view/electricitedefrance/messmer-pl... ), while Germany (especially the then-RDA part of it, Soviet-controlled) had huge reserves.

Phasing-out coal is therefore difficult for Germany, however it does so and the acceleration after Fukushima (2011) and during its nuclear phase-out is impressive: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-electricity-coal?ta...

France & Germany (beware: check the scales...): https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-generation-fr...

After Fukushima most German citizens didn't want nuclear reactors anymore: Which political parties switched most of the nuclear plants off since Fukushima? CDU/CSU: 14 FDP: 11 SPD: 9 Greens: 3 (source: https://x.com/HannoKlausmeier/status/1784158942823690561 )

Re: A pretty visualisation of the European power grid (2022)

#178

Post by natmaka »

fransje26 wrote: post #171
fransje26 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, the well loved trick of playing with statistics to make something look good. The current carbon intensity per KWh in Germany is 526g, vs 50g for France. The average yearly carbon intensity per KWh in Germany, is 354g. So, either the rest 40% of domestically generated power are hyper-polluting, or the other statistics don't hold up. Either way, with such a high carbon intensity, there is nothing to brag about. And…

Ah, and let's not forget the "issue" of zero solar & wind days, as happened at the beginning of the month, with 20 GW missing..

We know how to solve this ( https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/180592/european-cooperation-... ), and the corresponding continental fleet of renewables is a work in progress.

Re: A pretty visualisation of the European power grid (2022)

#179

Post by natmaka »

pyrale wrote: post #137
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2007 is not in the 1990s which is the point I responded to. France was cleaning up in the 1990s but Germany is still doing better than France in even 1999. As you helpfully point out they were about France's 2007 level (when they had 70% nuclear electricity, 40% nuclear power, a hair below their absolute peak 41% nuclear which they hit a few years later) in 2022, so catching up to a global leader with lots of nuclear…

> so catching up to a global leader with lots of nuclear despite phasing out their own nuclear. No catching up happened, because France also improved in the meantime, despite building no new plant in the 2007-2022 interval. And that's the issue with this measurement: it measures plenty of parasitic information. For instance, GDP growth between the 90's and now explains a large part of what you're highlighting. Here's…

> France also improved in the meantime, despite building no new plant in the 2007-2022 interval

Thanks to renewables: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-fossil-renewa...

Re: A pretty visualisation of the European power grid (2022)

#180

Post by natmaka »

masklinn wrote: post #81
qayxc wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, germany is more renewable but it's also more coal, any time there's no wind the coal plants start up. Hm. The actual facts say otherwise, though: https://www.destatis.de/EN/Themes/Economic-Sectors-Enterpris... So number go DOWN, not up, is what I'm seeing.

> Hm. The actual facts say otherwise They don't. > So number go DOWN, not up, is what I'm seeing. The comment I replied to is comparing germany to france. The map I linked literally tells you that in 2024 Germany generated 370g CO2 equivalent per kWh, where France generated 32, that's an objective number you can straight up read. Yes Germany is 58% renewable versus France's 28 (something the map also tells you), but…

> gas is a minor component of france's electricity mix

~9%

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/energy?Metric=Share+of+...

Post reply on HN