Arctic Sea Ice : Forum

AGW in general => Policy and solutions => Topic started by: rboyd on April 07, 2017, 07:31:13 PM

Title: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 07, 2017, 07:31:13 PM
Germany is a great example of a country with a mature energy and industrial sector (heavily weighted toward capital goods), together with slow economic growth. It does have an indigenous coal industry, but not any major players in oil or natural gas (unlike the US, for example). Up to now the Energiewende has been focused on the replacement of the nuclear electricity generating stations, which will complete in 2022. The result has been a flatlining in CO2 emissions since 2009, with emission in 2016 actually increasing.

http://ceenews.info/en/germanys-co2-emissions-between-ambition-and-reality/ (http://ceenews.info/en/germanys-co2-emissions-between-ambition-and-reality/)

After 2022 the renewables will start replacing fossil fuels directly, from a position of already having a large percentage share of the electricity generating sector. The country may then be a trailblazer in overcoming a number of challenges to the energy transition, that many of the mature industrial economies will face. These issues are starting to play out within the German political policy making landscape:

1. Overcoming the entrenched economic interests of the fossil fuel providers (i.e. the coal producers and coal-fired generating plant owners). This will involve the scrapping of many coal plants and the related coal producing areas, and attempts to stretch out the timeframes for such closures are already evident.

2. Integrating an increasing share of renewables into the generating network, which gets harder as the percentage penetration increases. The addition of quick-cycle natural gas plants does provide benefits in this area, but also increases fossil-fuel dependence.

3. Driving reduction in GHG's across the energy system, not just within the current electricity generating system. According to the President of the German Environment Agency "If things do not get started in the transport sector soon, we will miss our climate goals".

Germans still have a strong commitment to the energy transition, and its political processes are not infested with oligarch and corporate money in the same way as the U.S. It also has a very substantial indigenous engineering and capital good sector. If any country should be able to overcome such challenges, it should be Germany. So tracking their progress in detail will be instructive.

I see the opposite cases to Germany as the U.S. (massive entrenched fossil fuel interests and a big-money takeover of politics) and China (very rapid growth makes the addition of renewables and efficiency gains much easier, together with an authoritarian-bureaucratic state).

We have topics for China and India (which is at a much earlier and usually energy intensive stage of growth than China), so adding ones for Germany and the U.S. should provide a good sample of countries. As well as a majority of global GHG emissions.


Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 07, 2017, 08:16:29 PM
Germany to miss 2020 carbon reduction targets by a mile - closer to a 32% than a 40% reduction versus 1990.

https://energytransition.org/2017/03/germany-to-miss-2020-carbon-reduction-targets-by-a-mile/

The focus needs to move beyond the electricity sector, "The level of emissions from buildings is practically the same as in 1995; from transport, since 1990. Clearly, too little progress is being made in heat and transport; Germany’s energy transition remains an electricity transition  ... Germany has not yet figured out how to ramp up the rate of energy-efficient building renovations. And Berlin spent the past decade defending diesel rather than electric mobility, including public transportation."
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 07, 2017, 08:25:50 PM
Hamburg considers innovative heat storage scheme Uses underground heat storage to capture waste heat from industrial and power plants using saltwater aquifers.

If successful this could be utilized across many areas from Southern England, across Northern Germany and Poland for space heating.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: oren on April 07, 2017, 09:40:26 PM
Thank you rboyd for these new inportant threads.
Just a quick comment, if my memory is correct Germany is free of oil and gas interests but is somewhat infested by coal interests, which hampers efforts to clean up the act.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 08, 2017, 02:39:22 AM
No country in the world uses as much lignite (low quality coal) as Germany does. As noted in this article, decisions will wait until after the German general election this year "However, the plans for a complete coal phase-out are highly controversial, and so decisions are being postponed until after the federal elections this year."

http://www.dw.com/en/eu-needs-to-shut-all-coal-plants-by-2030-to-meet-climate-goals/a-37665345 (http://www.dw.com/en/eu-needs-to-shut-all-coal-plants-by-2030-to-meet-climate-goals/a-37665345)

Some other good articles on the challenges of shutting down the German coal mines and power plants:

http://www.dw.com/en/how-far-is-germany-from-a-complete-coal-exit/a-38214847 (http://www.dw.com/en/how-far-is-germany-from-a-complete-coal-exit/a-38214847)

http://www.570news.com/2017/03/31/owner-nixes-coal-mine-expansion-over-german-climate-plans/ (http://www.570news.com/2017/03/31/owner-nixes-coal-mine-expansion-over-german-climate-plans/)

http://www.platts.com/latest-news/coal/london/german-coal-gas-plant-output-at-5-year-high-in-26654502 (http://www.platts.com/latest-news/coal/london/german-coal-gas-plant-output-at-5-year-high-in-26654502)






Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: TerryM on April 08, 2017, 02:54:37 AM
Good thread covering material that I would have missed.


I understand that the EU has dropped objections to North Stream 2, and that will assure Germany of large volumes of cheap, unfracked gas from Russia. While fracking makes gas arguably as bad as coal, and LPG loses a huge proportion in cooling what remains, piped in gas might help with Germany's goals, at least in the near term.


Terry
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: DrTskoul on April 08, 2017, 03:03:17 AM
Good thread covering material that I would have missed.


I understand that the EU has dropped objections to North Stream 2, and that will assure Germany of large volumes of cheap, unfracked gas from Russia. While fracking makes gas arguably as bad as coal, and LPG loses a huge proportion in cooling what remains, piped in gas might help with Germany's goals, at least in the near term.


Terry

Fracked gas/un-fracked gas same thing.. it does not take much fracking to get gas out. Unlike tight oil ( Bakken, Oklahoma, etc.) methane leaks the same (or worse in unmonitored soviet/Eastern Europe pipelines). Russian gas is closer and cheaper and they value hard currency... unless when they turn the he spigots off...
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: DrTskoul on April 08, 2017, 03:08:03 AM
They could have done it if they had kept nuclear plants... but no ... they are bad too... heavy industry cannot run on sun and wind for now...
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 08, 2017, 03:18:37 AM
CH4 just wants to be free, and works hard at it from the wellhead right through to the end user. City distribution networks can be very leaky, and pipelines and storage facilities, not just fracking well-heads:

http://e360.yale.edu/features/with_new_tools_focus_on_urban_methane_leaks (http://e360.yale.edu/features/with_new_tools_focus_on_urban_methane_leaks)

http://www.pnas.org/content/109/17/6435.full (http://www.pnas.org/content/109/17/6435.full)

https://www.witpress.com/Secure/elibrary/papers/ESS14/ESS14012FU1.pdf (https://www.witpress.com/Secure/elibrary/papers/ESS14/ESS14012FU1.pdf)

Taking into account the fugitive emissions, together with the lack of sulphur aerosols (which produce  a cooling effect), CH4 is as best not much better than coal.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: DrTskoul on April 08, 2017, 03:21:37 AM
CH4 just wants to be free, and works hard at it from the wellhead right through to the end user. City distribution networks can be very leaky, and pipelines and storage facilities, not just fracking well-heads:

http://e360.yale.edu/features/with_new_tools_focus_on_urban_methane_leaks (http://e360.yale.edu/features/with_new_tools_focus_on_urban_methane_leaks)

http://www.pnas.org/content/109/17/6435.full (http://www.pnas.org/content/109/17/6435.full)

https://www.witpress.com/Secure/elibrary/papers/ESS14/ESS14012FU1.pdf (https://www.witpress.com/Secure/elibrary/papers/ESS14/ESS14012FU1.pdf)

Taking into account the fugitive emissions, together with the lack of sulphur aerosols (which produce  a cooling effect), CH4 is as best not much better than coal.

Then heavy sulfurous lignite is the best ....
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 08, 2017, 03:45:38 AM
Methane is a bridge to nowhere, counting the drop in the contents of the carbon dioxide pocket while ignoring the increasing contents of the methane pocket (as well as the decreasing sulphate particles). Bill McKibben covers this well:

https://www.thenation.com/article/global-warming-terrifying-new-chemistry/ (https://www.thenation.com/article/global-warming-terrifying-new-chemistry/)

Some progress being made in shutting down German coal (hard coal, not lignite) generating plants, hopefully not being replaced with methane:

"in November, Germany’s fifth-largest power generator, STEAG, cited “changes to the market environment brought about by energy policy” and persistently low power prices as reasons to close five of its hard coal units—a combined capacity of about 2.5 GW—before the end of 2017: West 1 and 2 in Voerde and Herne 3 in North Rhine-Westphalia, and Weiher and Bexbach in the Saarland. The company remarked that the troubling market conditions have led to “a situation in which many large-scale conventional power plants in Germany can no longer operate cost-effectively.”

http://www.powermag.com/market-conditions-force-coal-unit-closures-australia-germany/ (http://www.powermag.com/market-conditions-force-coal-unit-closures-australia-germany/)
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: DrTskoul on April 08, 2017, 03:55:02 AM
U need sth to generate steam for industrial use. Don't see many electrical steam generators large enough around...
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: TerryM on April 08, 2017, 04:32:06 AM
Lost a long reply & I'm not about to replicate it.


In general I agree that gas isn't a great replacement for coal, although a modern gas facility vs an aged lignite installation should show a huge improvement.


Terry
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: sidd on April 08, 2017, 05:15:19 AM
Re: industrial process steam

I needed live steam for the RBD (refine,bleach,decolor) veg oil process at one time. I found that adding solar preheat to incoming water feed hugely reduces fuel use. I wish more people would do that, cuts CO2 emission by a lot in the right seasons.

sidd
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 18, 2017, 06:37:12 PM
Germany emissions trend, no reduction since 2009. Shows the challenges that they are having with the headwind of shutting down low-carbon nuclear first. With the economy growing at less than 2% a year, they could be rapidly reducing emissions if they could drive down transport and building emissions - but “The efficiency improvements in vehicles have been wiped out by the growth in traffic on the roads”

Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 18, 2017, 08:00:30 PM
Quote
According to the President of the German Environment Agency "If things do not get started in the transport sector soon, we will miss our climate goals".

It's started.  Just this year we are seeing the first moderately priced long range EVs reaching the market.  Over short years EVs should become less expensive to purchase than same-model ICEVs.  Self-driving robocars will greatly lower private vehicle ownership.  Look for a quick flip away from petroleum based private transportation.

Electric buses are proving out.  Cities will quickly move from diesel to battery powered buses for the reasons of cost savings and cleaner air.  Cities seldom operate buses for more than twelve years so another rapid move from petroleum should be expected.

Electric trucks are starting to appear on roads.  This should be another transportation sector which should flip very rapidly.  Businesses are very sensitive to the bottom line and battery powered trucks will be money savers.  Plus there will be growing pressure from municipalities to reduce diesel use since we've started to understand the health problems caused by diesel pollution.

Ten years from now, probably by 2025, the only transportation issues we may have left will be airplane and cargo vessels.  Before then we could see the Hyperloop proved out and if it operates as suspected the 'loop should start replacing large amounts of air travel. 

Cargo vessels, we don't have a good solution at this time.  It may be that we'll do a lot more manufacturing close to markets, reducing the amount of shipping that we do.  And if we can get the amount low enough we might be able to do most/all with biofuel.

Oil tankers will be going extinct.  Coal freighters will be no more.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 18, 2017, 08:15:29 PM
Lost a long reply & I'm not about to replicate it.


In general I agree that gas isn't a great replacement for coal, although a modern gas facility vs an aged lignite installation should show a huge improvement.


Terry

That's true if we do a one to one natural gas:coal replacement.

But, unlike coal, gas plants are highly dispatchable.  They, unlike coal, can be turned off and back on very quickly.  That makes them excellent ways to fill in for wind and solar.  Coal can't do that very well.

(For a moment let's ignore the Storage Monster that's now getting its baby teeth.) 

Take the coal we have on our grid and assume we want to lower our CO2 output.  The Sun shines when demand is high so we might expect to get 40% of our electricity from solar.  The wind blows a lot of hours, a lot more than the Sun shines, so another 40% from wind.  That leaves a 20% role for gas plants.

We move from 100% coal to 20% CO2.  That's an 80% reduction in CO2 production.

(The Storage Monster is already starting to eat some of natural gas's lunch.  Over the next several years lunch, breakfast, and dinner will likely be snatched away from natural gas.)
---

Methane.  Methane leaks are largely controllable at natural gas wells and in distribution systems.  Methane does not have to leak.

Coal mining and processing releases large amounts of methane which are largely uncontrollable.  It's not likely we could put collection domes over open pit mines to capture the methane released.  Nor could we easily put containment vessels over coal crushing plants.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 18, 2017, 08:19:02 PM
Quote
it does not take much fracking to get gas out

Depends on the location.  Fracked gas wells in many parts of the US produce a lot of gas for the first year or so and then production falls very low.  The well has to be re-fracked or a new well drilled and fracked.

IIRC only one US field has NG wells that produce over multiple years.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 18, 2017, 08:29:29 PM
Quote
They could have done it if they had kept nuclear plants... but no ... they are bad too... heavy industry cannot run on sun and wind for now...

That's true.  But heavy industry can run on Sun, wind, and storage.  (Or dispatchable generation.)

It's simply a matter of building out the renewable generation and storage we need to fill our grids 24/365.  That will take several years, a few decades.  But there is no practical reason why we can't.
---

Nuclear is nothing more than a generator like wind, solar, geothermal, biofuel, tidal, and hydro.  It has a production charistic that is different from most renewable sources.  It most resembles geothermal in that both can be 'turned down' or turned off but curtailing either further increases their cost.

There's no fuel savings (or at least no significant savings) which means that capital and fixed operating costs have to be spread over fewer MWh, increasing the cost of electricity produced.

Nuclear, like renewables, requires backup.  And nuclear requires storage if the amount produced exceeds the annual minimum demand.  (Or curtailing which is a price driver.)
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: oren on April 18, 2017, 09:01:21 PM
Bob, I like your last series of posts (though somewhat OT here) but - it will take more than a few years, and it only applies to the "developed" countries. Globally it might take several decades if it happens at all.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 18, 2017, 09:43:36 PM
Bob, I like your last series of posts (though somewhat OT here) but - it will take more than a few years, and it only applies to the "developed" countries. Globally it might take several decades if it happens at all.

I don't know if you traveled in 'less developed' countries in the early part of this century.  If you did you may have seen how quickly many adopted cell phones.  Mobiles were very common in Thailand, for example, when few people in the US were using them.  I found myself amazed at how many people had mobiles in India when I knew almost no one who used one in the US.  Places with limited to no land line infrastructure just jumped straight to cells.

Same thing is happening in less developed countries with electricity.  They need more generation and to a large extent they are going straight to wind and solar.  They're not installing coal and nuclear and then having to replace those plants later on.  And they don't need to import fuel.

Wind and solar have huge advantages for developing countries.  They can be installed one turbine/one panel at a time.  No long years of developing a major project, seeking financing, finding the people with the skills to build the plant, waiting for years for power to start flowing.

A wind turbine can be stood and hooked to the grid in a few days.  A solar panel in an hour.  Energy flows and the turbine/panel starts paying for itself.

The investment per installation is miniscule compared to acquiring the money for a multiple year coal plant build.  A village or small town can purchase a turbine.  A single home or business can purchase a solar panel. 

It will take decades to replace fossil fuels in developed countries.  If we ramp up to installing renewable at the rate of 3% total generation per year in the US it will take us about a decade to replace coal and another decade to replace natural gas.  China and India may take a bit longer.  Europe may move quicker.

I suspect that in countries where electricity production is heavily influenced by market forces we're going to see huge increases in annual renewable installations.  Suppose you've got some money to invest.  You look at what the market is paying for electricity from a coal or gas plant and you realize that you can build a wind or solar farm, undercut the fossil fuel plant, and make a sweet profit.  The world has huge amounts of capital looking for decent places to invest.

And with the current practice of power purchase agreements (PPAs) you're guaranteed a market and pre-negotiated price before you acquire the land and pull permits.  Very safe investment and after the expiration of a 20 year PPA you've got a facility that can produce electricity for almost nothing for many more years.  Several decades in the case of solar.

Many more "First Solar" operations where the investors own the plant making the hardware and building the farms. 

We could see a movement from transitioning about 1% per year to 3% - 5% per year.  At 5% per year the US could replace all coal and NG in a decade.  It would take a few years to ramp to 5% but it's doable.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 18, 2017, 10:30:16 PM
The global percentage growth rate in installed renewables is decreasing, not increasing, according to IRENA. Global wind is already down to 12% growth and solar down to 31% (forecast to drop to 16% by 2022 by GTM Research).

http://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/Publications/IRENA_RE_Capacity_Statistics_2017.pdf (http://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/Publications/IRENA_RE_Capacity_Statistics_2017.pdf)

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/global-solar-market-forecast-to-hit-85gw-in-2017-with-surge-in-china (https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/global-solar-market-forecast-to-hit-85gw-in-2017-with-surge-in-china)

Back to Germany - "Germany to cut renewables growth in half"
https://energytransition.org/2017/02/germany-still-has-to-cut-renewables-growth-in-half/. (https://energytransition.org/2017/02/germany-still-has-to-cut-renewables-growth-in-half/.) 2025 share of renewables to be kept to a maximum of 45%.

Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 18, 2017, 10:59:28 PM
2016 was the second largest year for global wind installation.  Was 2016 a decrease or was 2015 a one year spike much higher than what would have been predicted from previous years?  2013 was an abnormally low year.  Then installation bounced back up in 2014 and bounced a lot in 2015.

Let's look at the data....

2011  40,635
2012  45,030
2013  36,023
2014  51,675
2015  63,633
2016  54,600

Now let's rank the years by most to least installation...

2015
2016
2014
2012
2011
2013

Year to year installation is not a smooth curve.

You might want to look at US installation rates which have been quite erratic due to federal subsidy programs and Congress.  I suspect uncertainty over subsidies cause a 2013 slump and a 2015 'rush to finish'.

The data I see says 2016 global solar installations increased by 53% over the previous highest year (2015).

2016, IIRC, installed more renewable generation than was installed in any previous year.

Don't be mislead by "growth percentages".  A 100% rate of growth when you have only 1 MW installed the previous year is 1 MW.  If you're starting with 100 MW installed and the rate of installation is only 10% you're adding 10 MW.

Growth rate acceleration is easy to accomplish in a transition.  Once the transition reaches a high enough rate there is no need for increased growth rates.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 18, 2017, 11:07:05 PM
Here's a chart of global solar panel demand through 2016 with predictions through 2022.  Personally I'd take the predictions with a grain of salt.  Prices continue to fall and it takes less than two years to bring a new silicon processing plant online.  Less time to start up a panel plant.

Falling battery prices are likely light a firecracker under solar installation rates.



(https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1000/1*rO5aJE0KtClsyTC9kioxtw.jpeg)

I haven't found an annual wind installation chart.  I've got one that I can put online and link later.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 18, 2017, 11:15:56 PM
Here's wind installed by year.  Was 2016 a big downturn or is it just the case that year to year data is noisy?  Look at the numbers, year to year.  Some years amount of installation takes a big jump.  Other years there are only small increases or even a decrease.


(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gwec.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F02%2F4_Global-Annual-Installed-Wind-Capacity-2001-2016.jpg&hash=bbc85a22e3b96b4af0f39061ff0ac638)

Taking a longer view we installed about 2.7x as much wind in 2016 as we did a decade earlier in 2007.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: TerryM on April 18, 2017, 11:42:27 PM
Might want to check local tariffs on Chinese solar panels. In Canada & the US they were over 280% if memory serves.


Terry
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 19, 2017, 01:39:34 AM
Back to Germany - "Germany to cut renewables growth in half"
https://energytransition.org/2017/02/germany-still-has-to-cut-renewables-growth-in-half/. 2025 share of renewables to be kept to a maximum of 45%.

Currently 29% from renewables, including 11.9% from wind and 5.9% from solar. Rest from hydro, biomass and waste - all which tend to be dispatchable.  As those are somewhat limited for future growth, it will be wind + solar which drive the growth in the future.

So maybe a doubling of wind+solar as a share of electricity generation by 2025, in 9 years. Not a high hurdle, as 8% per annum growth will do that (assuming no growth in electricity demand). 33% wind+solar share will start to test out the theories of running a power network with a large intermittent share.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 19, 2017, 02:09:03 AM
There's something else going on with Germany.  In 2016 Germany generated 648 TWh of electricity but consumed only 594 TWh.  8.5% of the electricity Germany generated was used in other countries.  Germany is burning coal for other countries.

Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 19, 2017, 02:15:31 AM
Here's the breakdown of German electricity sources that I linked on the nuclear thread.


(https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/lightbox_image/public/images/factsheet/fig10-germany-energy-mix-energy-sources-share-primary-energy-consumption-2016-1.png?itok=9XU_CiC5)

If Germany wasn't exporting 8.5% of their production they wouldn't need to burn hardly any lignite.   
---

I wonder about that 1.2% for solar.  Germany has a lot of rooftop solar, it that getting picked up in the stats?  End user solar was not included in US generation numbers until 2014 (IIRC). 
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: ghoti on April 19, 2017, 02:38:14 AM
Yeah end user solar generally isn't included. That's how this spring UK electricity demand during the day was lower than during the night. It wasn't really lower but appeared lower when looking at what the National Grid was supplying. The locally generated solar electricity is offsetting grid demand.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 19, 2017, 05:22:07 AM
Wiki says -

"Solar power in Germany consists almost exclusively of photovoltaics (PV) and accounted for an estimated 6.2 to 6.9 percent of the country's net-electricity generation in 2014"

Eyeballing the numbers it looks like Germany has really cut back on solar after 2012 but has ramped up wind.  330% increase in offshore wind from 2014 to 2015.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: GrauerMausling on April 19, 2017, 07:47:06 AM
“The efficiency improvements in vehicles have been wiped out by the growth in traffic on the roads”

It's actually a lot worse. As the Germans are buying SUVs like crazy and because of the drop in Diesel car sales (Dieselgate anyone? - some cities might have to ban Diesel cars altogether), the average fuel efficiency of a new car is DECREASING.
Between first quarter of 2016 and 2017 there was increase in the average CO2 emissions by 0.2 % to 127,7 g/km (based on the near to useless European measurement cycle). Those numbers are published by the 'Kraftfahrtbundesamt', a state agency.
As furthermore the difference between the actual fuel consumption and the 'official' one is increasing all the time - the difference is now up to 40% - the traffic sector will remain a huge problem.
I will move from Diesel to BEV, but this is not to common. The BEV numbers are increasing but the overall number is negligible, accounting only for 0.6% of all cars.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 19, 2017, 04:52:05 PM
Welcome GrauerMausling, looking forward to more insightful posts!
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: mati on April 19, 2017, 10:58:15 PM
the only response is better/faster/more convenient rapid transit.
self driving cars pick you up at home
deliver you to a local bus terminal
which takes you to a local train terminal

the only way to get rid of cars

and it has to be fast, and reliable and convenient
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 20, 2017, 01:41:31 AM
Self-driving cars will create the ability to have "spontaneous" carpools.  If you are willing to share your ride with others (ever ride a bus, train, plane?) in exchange for a cost savings the car you ride may pick up and drop off others along the way.

No need to be part of a formal carpool where you've got to figure out who is driving, who's staying home sick, working late, how much to pay the driver, etc.  The system will take your request and schedule you in immediately.  Chose to ride single and just pay more.

If we only doubled the number of occupants in commuting cars (largely single occupancy now, it seems) we could halve the number of cars on our roads.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: mati on April 20, 2017, 10:46:52 PM
all of this sounds really fantastic.

the car manufacturers are in a real panic, and will grab at this to help keep their sales up.

BUT

i don't see any of this becoming viable in less than 10 or 20 years.

the hype is HUGE and will bear watching

Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 21, 2017, 12:10:17 AM
all of this sounds really fantastic.

the car manufacturers are in a real panic, and will grab at this to help keep their sales up.

BUT

i don't see any of this becoming viable in less than 10 or 20 years.

the hype is HUGE and will bear watching

Self-driving?  Tesla has self-driving cars on the road now.  At speeds up to 80 mph.  For Tesla it's a matter of mapping all the roads which will take about a year once the Model 3 goes into production this summer. 

Pretty much all car companies are rushing to develop self-driving because they see the upcoming need.  Self-driving shouldn't add much to the cost of the car and most people are going to be willing to pay something.  Even if they use it only in low speed, stop and go commuting or long boring interstate drives.  And insurance rates are really going to favor cars with collision avoidance, which requires a large part of the self-driving hardware and computing power.

I think GM has looked ahead and decided that there will be a massive decrease in cars sold per year once robotaxis become common.  That's why (my guess) they bought Lyft.  Gives them a head start on morphing from a car manufacturer to a robotaxi company that manufacturers its own taxis.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 21, 2017, 04:02:50 AM
I will answer this on the cars thread where it belongs, this is the Germany thread.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 28, 2017, 08:55:43 PM
An interesting article about the energy market in Germany...

Quote
Germany's electricity market has become collateral damage in the country's transition to renewable energy. Fast falling prices pose an existential threat for the operators of conventional plants like E.ON and RWE.

Germany’s switch to renewable energy sources is a success story. Ever since the country dedicated itself to a transformation of its energy supply following Japan’s Fukushima nuclear disaster five years ago, renewables have been booming. Last year, they accounted for a third of the energy consumed in Germany.

But while this success goes far in protecting the climate and environment, it has an economic downside. The electricity market has come apart at the seams.

...

The price of electricity on the wholesale market has been in freefall for five years, plunging from €60 ($67.37) per megawatt-hour to the current €20.

The plunge in price is putting the heads of E.ON and RWE, Johannes Teyssen and Peter Terium respectively, in a predicament. With prices of €20, restructuring is in danger. ... “At these prices, not a single power plant is earning money,” RWE’s Mr. Terium said two weeks ago ....

...

At the moment, the two executives are watching as their business is virtually imploding. First gas-fired power plants were forced off the market, then the black coal plants, and now low-priced lignite and even nuclear energy is struggling against being shut down.

“We can keep the nuclear power plants running at these prices – but it isn’t worth replacing the fuel rods,” Mr. Terium said matter-of-factly.


And the article goes on to talk about what is likely to happen in the future.  It just looks worse and worse for non-renewable energy in Germany.

https://global.handelsblatt.com/companies-markets/electricity-prices-in-a-free-fall-478046 (https://global.handelsblatt.com/companies-markets/electricity-prices-in-a-free-fall-478046)



 
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Martin Gisser on April 29, 2017, 02:14:17 AM
Alas E.ON and RWE are "too big to fail". But they should. The management is amazingly stupid. (Seen that personally at E.ON. The last ones they ask are the engineers.) RWE is active in climate denial propaganda and corrupting politicians like Sigmar Gabriel (old Social Democrat coal connection).

They have been dragging their heels on Energiewende far too long, and now they complain that things no longer work like last century.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: sidd on April 29, 2017, 05:04:52 AM
E.ON split, didn't it ?

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-e-on-divestiture-idUKKCN0JE0TZ20141130 (http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-e-on-divestiture-idUKKCN0JE0TZ20141130)

so its the fossil asset powered generation bit is dead, thats why they did it.

sidd
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: nicibiene on April 29, 2017, 08:46:30 AM
EU decided to have more sharper limits for conventional  power plants - against Germany. The German government was concerned about the high investions the fossil Power Industry would have to make....  :-X

https://m.heute.de/detail/47070126

I just say: Germanys "Energiewende" is a big foul egg. We are burning more dirty coal then ever, producing more energy than needed. a) to enlarge the amount of energy, to press marketprices down, to let the dirtiest coal power plants earn their money as long as possible b) to produce a large gap between market prices and guaranteed prices for renewables. The gap is to be payed by private costumers only, that are told to save energy. So you have an exploding EEG reallocation charge, exploding energy prices - and a negative mood in the public regarding renewables, that are blamed by media to be the cause for the prices explosion.

All is a nice coal powered steam engine. lot of heat, lot of steam, but no movement....
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 29, 2017, 06:32:44 PM
Quote
I just say: Germanys "Energiewende" is a big foul egg. We are burning more dirty coal then ever,

No, that is not correct.

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi619.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt275%2FBob_Wall%2FGermany%2FGerman%2520Coal%2520Consumption%25201995%2520-%25202915%2520w%2520Trend%2520Line_1.png&hash=292c8971154752804da1522b827af388) (http://s619.photobucket.com/user/Bob_Wall/media/Germany/German%20Coal%20Consumption%201995%20-%202915%20w%20Trend%20Line_1.png.html)


Quote
producing more energy than needed

That is correct.  German electricity consumption is dropping but exports are rising.  German fossil plants are fighting to stay alive and other European countries are willing to purchase the coal-produced electricity they are selling at low prices.


Quote
The gap is to be payed by private costumers only

Yes, this seems to be unfair.  Other users of electricity should be paying a share of the cost of installing renewables.  German wholesale and industrial electricity costs have been falling.  Industry should at least pay what it paid a few years back with the difference between electricity costs and rate charged helping to pay the renewable subsidies.

Of course the subsidies are temporary.  They will disappear as FiT contracts expire.  As the most expensive FiT contracts expire retail rates will drop.

The world owes Germany (Spain and Italy) a large word of thanks for installing a lot of solar when panel prices were much higher, creating a larger market for panels, and causing the price of panels to plummet.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 29, 2017, 06:43:00 PM
Let's look more closely at Germany's electricity production and consumption...


(https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/lightbox_image/public/images/factsheet/fig7-german-power-import-export-1990-2016.png?itok=xsKKwAoR)

Generation (red line) has been increasing while in-country consumption (blue line) has been dropping.  Exports (grey bars) have been increasing.  If Germany exported no electricity we would see a much larger drop in Germany's CO2 emissions.  Charge those emissions to the countries purchasing electricity from Germany.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 29, 2017, 06:52:21 PM
Let me spend a bit of space on Germany's CO2 emissions...

This is the data through 2015.  Apparently there was a 1% increase in 2016.  Basically noise.  Probably due to more electricity being produced for the export market.

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi619.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt275%2FBob_Wall%2FGermany%2FGermany%2520CO2%2520Emissions%25201965%2520thru%2520%25202015.png&hash=148699684fe87ff9a33a24162b52760f) (http://s619.photobucket.com/user/Bob_Wall/media/Germany/Germany%20CO2%20Emissions%201965%20thru%20%202015.png.html)


Here's another way to look at CO2.  CO2 per capita which controls for population growth...

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi619.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt275%2FBob_Wall%2FGermany%2FCO2%2520per%2520Capiita%2520to%25202014.png&hash=71fe6b9cd37fdff82d132f711639750e) (http://s619.photobucket.com/user/Bob_Wall/media/Germany/CO2%20per%20Capiita%20to%202014.png.html)

And one more way.  CO2 per TWh electricity produced.  This may be the most meaningful statistic. 

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi619.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt275%2FBob_Wall%2FGermany%2FCO2%2520per%2520TWh.png&hash=979ca457af8582c19e1d4eafef434743) (http://s619.photobucket.com/user/Bob_Wall/media/Germany/CO2%20per%20TWh.png.html)


A very small increase following the post-Fukushima disaster nuclear plant closure and then back on track to producing cleaner electricity.


Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 29, 2017, 07:13:57 PM
I took a couple minutes and extended the CO2/TWh graph further back in time.

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi619.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt275%2FBob_Wall%2FGermany%2FCO2%2520per%2520Capita%25201985%2520thru%25202015.png&hash=c1be0726f0d4c1a90e0bf557a465e07e) (http://s619.photobucket.com/user/Bob_Wall/media/Germany/CO2%20per%20Capita%201985%20thru%202015.png.html)

What I see is a great downward slope, the "Fukushima stall", and then a return to declines as ususal.

Would that the entire planet had numbers like this.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: oren on April 30, 2017, 01:27:28 AM
Bob  I can't see any of the recent photos
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 30, 2017, 01:36:33 AM
I'm sorry.  After I linked I started arranging photos into albums on Photobucket and the links weren't updated.  I'll try to straighten things out.
---

eta:  I think I've fixed the broken links.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: nicibiene on April 30, 2017, 11:26:08 AM
Got this chart from official website of German government. Can't discover that kind of decline your chart shows. (BP 2016=Oil concern provided?!  :o) To be more precisely-we are not burning "more dirty coal than ever", but much more dirty coal than neccessary. In my opinion it is the religious believe that free, unregulated markets will heal all on their own....

In contrast to the official goals we find the absurd situation that the current market price structure
makes puzzlestone like pump storage and flexible modern gas power plants unprofitable.

And as a private user, if you decide to heat your house with effictive heat pump or you drive a EV, both powered with renewable energy  - you have to pay all the fees for energy transition too, more fees than you would pay if you use fossil oil or energy.... so you get laughtered as an idealistic fool, doing that investions that do not pay off financially.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: nicibiene on April 30, 2017, 11:40:07 AM
Here my pdf-calculations regarding driving an EV. It's in german, could translate -but maybe it is obviously also in german.

And if I compare the costs of my (much more expensive) heat pump with a conventional oil heating:
costs renewable energy from my supplier 2016: 1,040 EUR/y
costs for oil with same energy content 2016: 1,206 EUR/y
energy fees and charges: renewable 630 EUR/y vs. oil 127 EUR/y

changed:  "." toanglo "," 😁 .

Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 30, 2017, 07:24:41 PM
Exports are rescuing coal power, which is increasingly not needed to cover domestic demand

Are these exports helping to fund the baseload capacity required to balance the renewables in the short-term; can the coal plant be run at a relatively stable loading with exports offsetting doemstic demand cuts when renewables ramp up?

https://energytransition.org/2017/01/renewable-energy-production-stagnates-in-germany-in-2016/

(https://energytransition.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/img3.png)

Much bigger focus required outside the electricity sector, on transport (oil) and heating (gas):

(https://energytransition.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/img1.png)



Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 30, 2017, 07:38:41 PM
Renewable energy made up just over 41% of Germany’s power supply last month, the most ever at around 19.5 TWh

https://energytransition.org/2017/04/march-was-a-record-month-for-renewable-power-in-germany/

(https://energytransition.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/cm1.png)
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on April 30, 2017, 11:50:25 PM
Quote
Got this chart from official website of German government. Can't discover that kind of decline your chart shows. (BP 2016=Oil concern provided?!  :o) To be more precisely-we are not burning "more dirty coal than ever", but much more dirty coal than neccessary. In my opinion it is the religious believe that free, unregulated markets will heal all on their own....

Which of the charts I posted are you referencing? 

Please translate the column heading on your chart.  I don't see anything about the amount of coal being burned, only info about emissions.  But I don't read German.

Germany is burning a lot more coal than necessary.  Lots to supply the export market.

BP reports both tonnes and "oil equivalents" for fossil fuels.  Using oil equivalents allows comparision from one fuel to another.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on May 01, 2017, 12:06:18 AM
Quote
Here my pdf-calculations regarding driving an EV. It's in german, could translate -but maybe it is obviously also in german.

If you use German retail electricity prices when calculating EV charging costs they are going to come out high.  But the underlying cost of German retail electricity for larger volume consumers is roughly the cost of electricity in France.

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi619.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt275%2FBob_Wall%2FGermany%2FGermany%2520Retail%2520wo%2520Tax.png&hash=04920898e0e6ae650834085477e2bdf0) (http://s619.photobucket.com/user/Bob_Wall/media/Germany/Germany%20Retail%20wo%20Tax.png.html)

It's all about taxes.  Germany piles the taxes onto their cost of electricity.

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi619.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt275%2FBob_Wall%2FGermany%2FGerman%2520Retail%2520with%2520Tax.png&hash=5810ce3492d2b11d1e5257772e13ae64) (http://s619.photobucket.com/user/Bob_Wall/media/Germany/German%20Retail%20with%20Tax.png.html)

I'm not sure that makes any sense at all if the goal is to lower CO2 emissions.  Roll the subsidies back onto general tax dollars and quit adding VAT (sales) tax to retail electricity.  Germany has a disincentive program for getting off fossil fuels in place.

Same with heat pumps.  Either drop the high taxes on retail electricity or create special rates for EV charging and home heating.  In California the average price for retail electricity is 18.6 cents but if you're charging an EV you pay only 9 cents.  Easy enough to have lower qualifying rates for houses that have EVs and/or heat pumps.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on May 01, 2017, 12:09:11 AM
Quote
Are these exports helping to fund the baseload capacity required to balance the renewables in the short-term; can the coal plant be run at a relatively stable loading with exports offsetting doemstic demand cuts when renewables ramp up?

No.  From what I've heard exports are not rising when the wind is blowing harder or the Sun shining. 

Don't have any data.  Data rules.

My take is that fossil and nuclear plants in Germany are selling whenever they can in order to postpone bankruptcy.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on May 01, 2017, 12:14:31 AM
Quote
Much bigger focus required outside the electricity sector, on transport (oil) and heating (gas):

Remember, a very large portion of primary energy used for transportation (and electricity generation) will not need to be replaced.  Over 50% of all fossil fuel energy is lost as waste heat.

Take a look at how much primary energy was wasted in the US in 2014.  Almost 60%.

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi619.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt275%2FBob_Wall%2FUS%2FEnergy_US_2014.png&hash=eb6f4edf1dcf39644bd178def7f31e22) (http://s619.photobucket.com/user/Bob_Wall/media/US/Energy_US_2014.png.html)

Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on May 01, 2017, 01:07:38 AM
Here's the 2016 version...



(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi619.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt275%2FBob_Wall%2FUS%2FEnergy_US_2016.png&hash=d7c904bdd6a9f7aa986e818357732655) (http://s619.photobucket.com/user/Bob_Wall/media/US/Energy_US_2016.png.html)

There will be some wasted energy when we use renewables.  EVs may be the most wasteful.  About 10% of the incoming energy will be lost as heat while charging batteries and an additional 10% lost due to friction loss between motor and road.  (Moving to inhub wheels might lower that some.)
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: nicibiene on May 01, 2017, 11:36:54 AM
I'm not sure that makes any sense at all if the goal is to lower CO2 emissions.  Roll the subsidies back onto general tax dollars and quit adding VAT (sales) tax to retail electricity.  Germany has a disincentive program for getting off fossil fuels in place.

In my heat pump compairision was VAT even excluded. The financial ministry even earns much more VAT on the higher taxes of renewables!  :o (what the hell is the sense in there?!)

Quote
Much bigger focus required outside the electricity sector, on transport (oil) and heating (gas):

Indeed that is the problem! The price system in place is a disincentive system for private costumers that are not common with the urgent problem of climate change. The private sector currently has to carry ALL the costs of renewables. All high energy industry (and the rules for that got lower and lower) has not to pay anything.

If you want to get a movement into transport and heat you either need a well informed public that is willing to install the new techniques, drive an EV or you need a price system that could make a guiding job.

At the moment, if you turn your energy consumption to renewables, or even install own PV, you are the biggest looser ever. Blamed a) having too much money to "waste" b) causing high energy prices. Beside that the system serves the well established german envy factor.  :D

The transistion of all -energy, transport, heat- is a transistion to electricity. Why not dividing the costs through the wider basis of fossil fuels? The costs could be also lower if there were no import duties on chinese solar panels, protecting the European factories (and prices)....

The low market price of energy, and so the costs causing gap to guaranteed price for renewables is caused by overproduction of coal powered energy... but the mechanism of the price system is well hidden, and the media does NOTHING to explain it. It is told: higher amount of renewables is causing higher EEG-Umlage, grids have to be built out due to renewables = higher costs for your electricity - no alternative.

All that mess is no coincidence, but the work of thousands of fossil lobbyists and industry close politicians, that are not willing to change a failing system obviously giving no answers for the future.

By the way: my posted chart refered to the last chart before tCO2/TW it was about the development of gCO2/kWh.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: nicibiene on May 01, 2017, 04:11:46 PM
Additionally I highly recommend the website of Fraunhofer institute-here you can find everything about Germanys power production, prices, export... -a kind of magic that site, even in full english available. :)

There I found about the increase of the export first after I did some resarch powered by my curiotisy. - but I actually find that there are no more that nice interactive cake diagrams for export/import since 2015 - I could swear there were the 2016/2017 too recently! I also can not find any monthly datas about export since Feb. 2017-  :-X maybe another try to hide some unconvinient datas-preparing the upcoming election?

https://www.energy-charts.de/power.htm (https://www.energy-charts.de/power.htm)

Another aspect is a total stagnation of installation of new PV since 2013/2014 due to drastic cuts in the guaranteed prices.

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.solaranlage-ratgeber.de%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Finfografiken%2Fsolarstrom-foerderung-kosten-bsw.jpg&hash=ca959c206cc0a1cf97255392c2b07688)

graphic shows the guaranteed payment decreased more than the system prices and so it got all pretty unattractive for bigger players or investors.

As I´m planning my own PV I had to realize that the guaranteed price is very, very close to my costs-no bonus profit for capital investment risk to get anymore-as it was in the beginning of EEG (about 20% profit I think). The entire thing is only "profitable" for people that could consume the electricity directly when it is produced. Otherwise it is a nearly null game or a thing of idealism-with the investion risk you have to carry. The investion pays off after 10 years.

Beside there are nearly no banks that offer KFW-credits for PV for privates. As bank houses earn generally nothing due to the low level of interests they are not willing to do the unprofitable business with low-interest KfWloans.

Another thing is the absolutely complicated -and expensive- tax administration of every single little PV power plant. You even have to pay VAT on the energy you use directly - calculated on the basis of the price you would have to pay if you buy it expensive at a supplier. Of course you have the choice to do the small buisness without VAT, but then it makes the thing even more expensive, because you loose the chance to get the VAT from your installation invoice...

All in one all is done to make the thing absulutely unattractive for people, to let the people feel angry about the renewable idea as a whole - and the communication about climate change is nearly not taking place in the public, newspapers or TV.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on July 25, 2017, 05:26:49 AM
The future of Germany’s Energiewende

"A key decision for voters in the coming election will be who guides the country’s Energiewende. Germany’s much-feted transition to a low carbon economy is going to face challenging circumstances in the next legislative period (2017 – 2021).

First, 2020 will be a year of reckoning for the incoming coalition. Germany is likely to meet its renewable targets but fall short on goals to cut energy consumption and increase energy productivity under its EU obligation. Most damaging for the Energiewende’s international credibility, the government will miss its national 2020 climate target by a wide margin. Instead of cutting emissions by 40%, the latest estimates see the country hitting only 32%."

(https://energytransition.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Screen_Shot_2017-07-11_at_11.19.52.png)

"With near-term targets likely to be missed, the challenge ahead is to meet the country’s mid-term targets. These include cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 55% from 1990 levels and increasing the share of renewables in the power supply to at least 50% by 2030."

(https://energytransition.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Screen_Shot_2017-07-11_at_11.48.39.png)

https://energytransition.org/2017/07/the-future-of-germanys-energiewende/ (https://energytransition.org/2017/07/the-future-of-germanys-energiewende/)





Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Bob Wallace on July 25, 2017, 07:45:31 AM
Thought I'd take a look at how Germany is doing with CO2 emissions relative to 1990.

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4326/35980249302_ffc27194a7_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/WPsbzU)

Very unlikely Germany will meet their 2020 goal. They weren't really on track prior to the Fukushima disaster and their decision to close reactors earlier than planned stalled them out for a couple of years.  (Eyeballed lower red arrow line.)

Resetting the hypothetical line higher doesn't help.

However, what is not shown is the impact of Germany (perhaps) putting a lot of EVs/PHEVs on their roads between 2020 and 2030.

I don't know what will happen in Germany politically.  Will coal fight a tough retreat or will the rapid falling price of wind (especially offshore) and solar take over and drop emissions faster than the 1990 to 2010 rate?  Will the German green movement be reinvigorated?
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on August 24, 2017, 07:14:30 PM
Wind power hit record low price in German auctions. Few are happy.

The structure of the auctions gave precedence to "citizen" projects, quite a few of which seem to be fronts for big companies. These projects don't have to have an environmental impact assessment in place, and have 54 months (rather than 30) to complete the project. Overall impact will be to delay the implementation of the next bunch of wind projects, slowing down the growth of wind capacity within Germany.

"There has been the great criticism of the auction’s definition of “citizen projects.” The government has already stated that this category will be done away with for future auctions; there was simply not enough time to get rid of it in the second round based on the results from the first round (report in German), in which a company called Enertrag organized citizen groups in order to become eligible for preferential treatment.

“Citizen projects” have 54 months to be built instead of 30 months – though that shorter timeframe is already quite generous. In addition, citizen wind projects do not have to already have an environmental impact assessment, which under German law is essentially also a construction permit, to take part in the auctions."

"As in the first round, it is not certain that all of these winning projects will actually pass the environmental impact assessment, which they nonetheless need in order to start building. The result could be a very low volume of new builds starting in 2019 because “citizen projects” from 2017 have until 2021/2022 to be completed. This downturn may not yet be felt fully in 2018 because of the current backlog of projects under construction."

https://energytransition.org/2017/08/wind-power-hit-record-low-price-in-german-auctions-few-are-happy/ (https://energytransition.org/2017/08/wind-power-hit-record-low-price-in-german-auctions-few-are-happy/)



Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 29, 2019, 02:47:51 AM
Betrayed: Germany’s government quashes EU carbon neutrality

Quote
Recently a leaked EU-planning document reported by EURACTIV (and confirmed by CLEW) revealed that at a two-day Brussels summit, a group of nations led by Germany and including Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic “have refused to specifically link EU climate action with the 1.5°C objective. They also oppose any time-bound commitment to the EU’s climate neutrality objective, deleting any reference to 2050 for reaching that goal.”

Quote
But all these signs seem lost upon much of Germany’s government, which instead is more intent than ever to slow down the energy transition. Repeated failures such as the Diesel-Gate Scandal, the nation missing its 2020 pledged emissions targets, the continued expansion of lignite mining (despite the recommendations of so-called Coal Commission) have incensed the public. Yet Germany’s Grand Coalition between the SPD and CDU keeps choosing fossil fuel dependency while denying physics, ignoring public sentiment and ensuring the heatwave isn’t going to break anytime soon. As this story goes to press, the Grand Coalition is now paving the way for fracked LNG imports from the US and an overall gas-powered economy.

Quote
Despite announcing a renewed focus on the environment in response to the growing Fridays for the Future demonstrations, sadly “Germany’s response to unprecedented protests by young people all over the world is essentially to put the brakes on European climate action,” said Sebastian Mang, EU climate policy adviser at Greenpeace. As the governing parties continue to circumvent the science and ignore the public, no wonder the Greens have become the nation’s third most popular party, gaining nearly as many new members last year as the CDU lost.

https://energytransition.org/2019/04/betrayed-germanys-government-quashes-eu-carbon-neutrality/ (https://energytransition.org/2019/04/betrayed-germanys-government-quashes-eu-carbon-neutrality/)
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 29, 2019, 02:52:41 AM
Sacrifice towns: dispatches from Germany’s Energiewende frontlines

Quote
Each day, the mammoth bucketwheel excavators on the horizon creep closer. Ahead of them comes a swarm of smaller chopping, digging, pumping and bulldozing machines, ripping through the landscape, removing trees, unearthing graves, flattening houses, destroying ancient churches, eviscerating communities—all to get at the coal buried deep beneath. For the thousands of people whose families have lived in these towns for generations, the pathway through Germany’s “Coal Exit” runs literally straight through their kitchens.

Since the end of World War II, dozens of centuries-old villages have fallen victim to expanding open-pit cast mining in Germany’s coal heartland. Without a change in energy planning, over the next decade even more will be first abandoned, then razed to the ground, and finally obliterated by the advancing excavators. Given how much of Germany was lost due to wars and fascism, how ironic that corporations like RWE Energy can now rain further destruction upon the countryside and wipe out villages that survived last century’s insanity.

https://energytransition.org/2019/04/dispatches-from-germanys-energiewende/ (https://energytransition.org/2019/04/dispatches-from-germanys-energiewende/)
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: NeilT on April 29, 2019, 12:53:28 PM
The Greens DEMANDED and end to Nuclear power in Germany.

Now they have it.

Strange that they are so unhappy....

Once, half a decade ago, I took the government guidance figures on Wind farm average energy production and calculated the baseload power of the UK by the average output of the wind turbines (at the time), against the square km of the UK.  It turned out to be one turbine every quarter of a km for the entire land surface of the UK.  Of course this assumes that the wind is blowing; which we know doesn't happen for at least a week at certain points in the UK.

Aspiration may be the mistress.  But Reality is the Master.  Greens, in Germany today, are reaping the bitter harvest of understanding that the Master, or reality, trumps the Mistress of aspirations every day of the week.

The plan of the Cameron government was thirds.  One third Nuclear, one third CCGT and one third renewable to top up the other two thirds when it was available.  It was a good strategy, one which is allowing the UK to phase Coal out entirely from the generating landscape.  A strategy which is going to be crippled by Green politics.

Sometimes I do wonder if the Greens actually understand that CO2 driven AGW is the true challenge for the next 10 generations?  Rather than the NIMBY attitude on Nuclear and burning ever increasing amounts of coal to feed their HUGE power requirements for their businesses?
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: b_lumenkraft on April 29, 2019, 01:48:02 PM
Neil, i think you are making some wrong assumptions here.

First of all, you need to recalculate. It's now a half a decade later. A lot has been done to make windmills way more efficient in recent years.

Quote
Alstom's ECO 100 wind uses a 122-meter rotor, which is a nearly 40 percent increase from the 100-meter rotor used on the same turbine less than five years ago.
Link >> https://www.power-eng.com/articles/print/volume-118/issue-3/features/advancements-in-wind-turbine-technology-improving-efficiency-and-reducing-cost.html

Second, the conservative CDU (Merkel did that single-handed to be precise) was responsible for phase-out of nuclear, not the greens.

I agree the greens in Germany don't have a convincing climate action plan though. And this is actually a tragedy.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: NeilT on April 29, 2019, 03:31:18 PM
Neil, i think you are making some wrong assumptions here.

First of all, you need to recalculate. It's now a half a decade later. A lot has been done to make windmills way more efficient in recent years.

Quote
Alstom's ECO 100 wind uses a 122-meter rotor, which is a nearly 40 percent increase from the 100-meter rotor used on the same turbine less than five years ago.
Link >> https://www.power-eng.com/articles/print/volume-118/issue-3/features/advancements-in-wind-turbine-technology-improving-efficiency-and-reducing-cost.html

Second, the conservative CDU (Merkel did that single-handed to be precise) was responsible for phase-out of nuclear, not the greens.

I agree the greens in Germany don't have a convincing climate action plan though. And this is actually a tragedy.

Even with a 100% upgrade in turbines and a 100% upgrade in efficiency (to 60%), there are still several major problems.

Space: Simply there is not enough space on land even at this level of efficiency
Cost:  Offshore wind is crippling the longer the field has to be maintained compared to more conventional power.
Surface roughening:  The power returned is a diminishing value where the more you roughen the surface with extensive wind farms, the less power you get from the wind overall.  It is a finite resource which we will reach the limits of eventually
Becalming:  Simply put there are days, leading into a week or more, where there is no wind.  Making wind an additional power source, not baseload.

As for Merkel?  Tell me she was not influenced by the Greens?  I remember the shock horror after Fukushima and the blind determination of the Greens to do away with Nuclear "at any cost".

Today, in Germany, Coal is the "any cost" factor.  I hate it because fanaticism is fanaticism no matter whether it is applied to a good thing or a bad thing.  For instance, in the UK, we emit 100m tonnes of CO2 more than the CO2 cost of producing new glass.  Simply by how we recycle it.  Fanaticism says we must recycle.  The "at any cost" is 100m tonnes of CO2.


Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: b_lumenkraft on April 29, 2019, 04:22:10 PM
Space: Simply there is not enough space on land even at this level of efficiency
... Surface roughening...
... Becalming...

I want to see this calculations you made on these claims, please.

As for Merkel, i don't know how you can make the claim the policies are influenced by the greens. She self said she made the decision based on the Fukushima incident.

BTW Germany is also phasing out of coal if you didn't get that memo, so i don't know what you mean with fanaticism in this context but you are very close to discrediting yourself.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: oren on April 29, 2019, 05:37:56 PM
Even with a 100% upgrade in turbines and a 100% upgrade in efficiency (to 60%), there are still several major problems.

Space: Simply there is not enough space on land even at this level of efficiency
According to one source I found offhand (https://sciencing.com/much-land-needed-wind-turbines-12304634.html), a wind turbine requires about 0.75 acres / MW.
Actual wind farms take up much more than that, at 4MW / km2, including all the agricultural land in between. Even with these assumptions, And even assuming you need 180 GW capacity, to generate the whole peak electricity usage of the UK of ~53 GB, at efficiency of only 30%, gets you to 45,000 km2, less than 20% of the UK's land area.
Now count the agricultural land included in this, reduce due to increased efficiency, reduce due to huge offshore turbines, reduce due to solar and hydro, reduce due to batteries flattening peak load, and you get a much smaller number. And you even gain the area covered by coal and CCNG plants, including the area required for transportation of the fossil fuels. IMHO, certainly doable from land area point of view.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Neven on April 29, 2019, 05:42:23 PM
Quote
I hate it because fanaticism is fanaticism no matter whether it is applied to a good thing or a bad thing.

You mean like demanding 'options' so you can transport your toys to your second home abroad, without having to feel guilty towards your grandchildren? One has to be pretty fanatical to believe in such a reality.

Energy supply isn't the problem, as much as growing energy demand is. And that's because too many people aren't serious about AGW. 'Soft denial' I saw someone affiliated with Extinction Rebellion call it on a BBC panel discussion I watched the other day.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Shared Humanity on April 29, 2019, 09:23:03 PM
Space: Simply there is not enough space on land even at this level of efficiency

 :o The wind farms that are being built across Indiana are surrounded by some of the most productive farmland on the planet.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: sidd on April 29, 2019, 10:15:41 PM
Some wind energy papers:

https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/106/27/10933.full.pdf

"The analysis in this article suggests that a network of land-based 2.5-MW turbines operating at as little as 20% of rated capacity, confined to nonforested, ice-free regions would be more than sufficient to account for total current and anticipated future global demand for electricity. The potential for the contiguous U.S. could amount to ~16 times current consumption."


Influence of  turbine drag:

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2007JAS2509.1

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2007JAS2509.1

" Suppose that use of wind power were to grow 100-fold to 2 TW ... the resulting peak changes in seasonal mean temperature might be ~ 0.5 K ... These climatic changesare detectable above background climatic variability in model runs of a few decades in duration, but they might remain too small to detect in the presence of other anthropogenic change and natural climate variability."

sidd
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Neven on April 29, 2019, 11:17:42 PM
But, but, but the stupid, fanatic Greens that cause all the troubles!  ::)
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on April 29, 2019, 11:43:10 PM
I am all for much more fanatical greens, we need them!
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on September 21, 2019, 01:51:13 AM
Is Germany too stingy to fund the fight against climate change?
https://www.dw.com/en/is-germany-too-stingy-to-fund-the-fight-against-climate-change/a-50452781
Quote
As finance minister, Scholz has set out the 2020 federal budget without earmarking any new debts. Can this be maintained?

Scholz said additional revenue from cost increases tied to CO2 emissions would create "more room to maneuver than one might think."

But he has been crunching the numbers with his coalition partners in mind. The CSU/CDU are unwilling to sacrifice the "black zero" of a balanced budget under any circumstances — not even to protect the climate.

That is why the debate within the CDU has become such a heated one: The party leadership maintains that if extra environmental costs are necessary, they must be absorbed by making cutbacks elsewhere.

Read more: German 'meat tax' on the table to protect the climate

For the SPD, slashing public spending to earmark funds for the environment is not an option.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on September 21, 2019, 08:12:56 AM
Just contemplate for a minute. Money is cheap at the moment. It was never cheaper, you can borrow as a nation-state without paying any interest at all. If you are Germany, they even give you money to take their money in some cases.

And Germanies holy goal is not borrowing money ATM.

No, Donald Trump is not the only complete moron in office...
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on September 21, 2019, 09:27:38 AM
Germany don't borrows money, but Germany prints large amounts of money. The biggest part of all the money the ECB printed was to buy german debt. A bankrupted place full with illegals, that's what germany is.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on September 21, 2019, 11:44:41 AM
Germany don't borrows money, but Germany prints large amounts of money. The biggest part of all the money the ECB printed was to buy german debt. A bankrupted place full with illegals, that's what germany is.

LOL, that's so far away from the reality i don't even know where to start.

Alexander, how do you know things about Germany? Do you speak German? Is there a German blog or news source you are following? Is there anything that connects you to Germany other than the American Nazi blogs you are reading?
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on September 21, 2019, 12:19:59 PM
The average Italian or Spaniard has more savings than the average German. You are to poor to pay for the costs of your illegals. That's why the ECB has to print everything. And from the savings you have in Germany a big part is parked with a small part of the population. Destroyed by globalists and left wingers. You had to compete with China, and now you have become like China. The China from 20 years ago.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on September 21, 2019, 12:41:52 PM
Well, i don't know why savings rate is a measurement for you, but when it is, the US is surely a real shithole country in your view. Why do you hate America so much?

https://data.oecd.org/natincome/saving-rate.htm

BTW, according to Eurostat the savings rate in the EU is ~ 12%, Germany ~11%, Spain minus ~5%, Italy ~8%.

You know nothing Jon Snow.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on September 21, 2019, 01:04:00 PM
Without printing money, there would be no savings in Europe. And for germany they printed the most.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on September 21, 2019, 01:22:54 PM
You obviously don't know that Germany isn't printing any money anymore (which is sad!). It's the ECB doing that. We have the Euro as a currency now.

Alexander, you need to stop reading Breitbart&Co. They are brainwashing you.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: gerontocrat on September 21, 2019, 01:44:46 PM
Germany has (or at least used to have) in its blood and bone the memory of the hyperinflation of the 1920s, that lead to the rise of Hitler & then.......

After WWII the national effort in W. Germany to rebuild the economy and make enough money to repay Marshall Aid was quite extraordinary.

Until the Euro, German economic and financial policy had just one over-riding objective - maintaining the value of the D-Mark - avoiding inflation. They still resist any move that weakens the Euro, and most Germans wish they still had the D-Mark (Deutschmark), and do not like QE (Quantitative Easing).

That is why they will not spend more than they earn. Germany's  Government runs a budget surplus, they have a trade surplus. So there is an emotional resistance to the Government borrowing required to accelerate green energy.

And remember, Chancellor Merkel is from East Germany, which had a very rough time before, during and after unification. After that, indulgence in possibly reckless financial behaviour is just not on.

Mind you, I hope that Germany does embrace the financial and economic logic of getting on with moving to zero-carbon at a faster rate.
____________________________________________

ps: It would be nice if Alexander555 could keep his obviously racist agenda to himself.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: kassy on September 21, 2019, 01:58:19 PM
Money printing is eroding the savings long term which is more a problem for the austere north.

Dutch and German policies are similar but we are now going to lend more money. Basically you can grow depth as GDP grows and both nations have not done that for a while so we have a margin (according to some economy professor).

Also if we invest in a sensible way in what is necessary to reach climate goals some of that money will flow back.

We need more people working on changing the electric grid (Germany needs north south connections and the Netherlands needs better connections to historical low use regions so we can put big solar parks there) so that is lots of jobs in that area. Maybe some people losing jobs in ICE manufacturing can be retrained for that.

Borrowing money at the current rates is not bad if we invest it in the right measures.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on September 21, 2019, 02:30:57 PM
Germany has (or at least used to have) in its blood and bone the memory of the hyperinflation of the 1920s, that lead to the rise of Hitler & then.......

Well, that's what we tell the world as an excuse. Actually, this story doesn't make sense though. Germanies hyperinflation took place from 1921 to 1923. Hitler became Kanzler in 1933, ten years later.

The reason he got Kanzler is that the racist people elected him. It's that simple.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on September 21, 2019, 02:32:34 PM
You obviously don't know that Germany isn't printing any money anymore (which is sad!)

I mean, it's sad that Alexander doesn't know that. it's not sad that we have the Euro IMHO.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on September 21, 2019, 04:00:25 PM
The ECB's headquarter is in Frankfurt. And they printed already 4000 billion. And they just announced more money printing. Over here we have billion euro bills falling from the sky, year after year. We saved 10 billion 4 years ago. And now we have to save 12 billion again. And these bills come from family reuniting, money you get for your children, social housing.....So we have a constant deficit. Every year the government needs a couple more billions, billions for who nobody is paying at that moment. That's something they have to figure out the years after. And the bills keep comming in year after year. They just fall from the sky. We have a better social security as Germany or the UK. But we will have to bring it down. Because to many of these illegals in Germany, move to Belgium. Because here they get more. And saving 12 billion, in Germany that would be something like 100 billion.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on September 21, 2019, 06:29:09 PM
The Nazi government of the 1930's turned around the German economy spectacularly using money printing that was spent on real economic goods (and armaments). When there is slack in the economy, and new money is spent on productive assets, it does not create inflation. Excellent piece on this:

https://medium.com/@vathsan32/nazi-germanys-economic-recovery-the-brilliance-of-hjalmar-schacht-64e53f3a721f (https://medium.com/@vathsan32/nazi-germanys-economic-recovery-the-brilliance-of-hjalmar-schacht-64e53f3a721f)

In the post-WW2 period the "ordoliberals" (actually a precursor of the neoliberals, as ordoliberals see the state's duty to create and maintain "free" markets) took over. Once the post-war economic miracle had waned after the 1970's, policy was directed toward wage-rise suppression - which increases profits, suppresses consumption and creates a large trade surplus.

https://www.cairn-int.info/article-E_LECO_060_0048--a-german-approach-to-liberalism.htm (https://www.cairn-int.info/article-E_LECO_060_0048--a-german-approach-to-liberalism.htm)

This was the real reason for the Euro-crisis - Germany would not increase consumption to aid Greece, Spain etc. Instead the ECB bailed out Deutsche Bank etc. by buying all their bad loans (tranferring losses from private financiers to the public) and imposed a restructuring austerity that facilitated lots of profit making opportunities (e.g. buying state assets on the cheap) for the financiers. The Euro actually greatly benefitted German exporters, as it was at a lower exchange rate level than a pure Deutschmark would have been, due to it representing a balance of nations with less strong economies and trade surpluses.

All of the money printing has gone toward bailing out the financiers through the purchase of bad assets (just like the Fed did with the US banks) and supporting the price of the sovereign debt which those banks hold massive amounts of. If some of that printed money had been given to the average person, and the financiers made to take their losses while protecting depositors, Europe would be in a much better place.

This is why a "Green New Deal" funded by money printing would not be inflationary, as it would create real assets and fund the closure of fossil fuel assets (without which a financial crash would be created).

Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: gerontocrat on September 21, 2019, 07:21:39 PM
The data on Belgium says that Germany, except as a trading partner, has nothing to do with the Public Finances of Belgium.

As for the EU, they played a major part in helping to get Belgium's public debt down from the stratosphere from the mid-1990's to the mid-2000's..

And illegals - no visible impact on the Public Finances of Belgium at all.


The posts from Alexander555 on this subject have no basis in fact whatsoever.
______________________________________________________________
- Govt Debt as a % of GDP rose from about 75% in 1980 to 133% in 1995, as a consequence of and an inadequate Government response to the 1979 oil shock, i.e.shelling out money without commensurate gains in GDP growth. Having Governments with a life span of only just over a year did not help. Belgium along with Italy were regarded as the bad boys of Europe at the time.

- This debt went down to about 85% of GDP by 2008, largely as a response to EU / ECB policies required as conditionalities of joining the Euro.

- But in 2009 we had the financial crash, mainly caused by reckless lending by the private sector, led by the USA and to some extent the UK.  Governments spent oodles to avoid civil society disturbances, so Belgium Govt debt rose to about 105% of GDP by 2014.

Since then, increase in debt has been mostly below increase in GDP, lowering the debt to 102% in 2018, 101% estimated for 2019.

- The medium term forecasts make extremely dull reading.

Nothing to do with illegals,
Nothing to do with Germany, except if Germany's economy hits the rocks, all Europe's economies will feel the pain.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on September 21, 2019, 07:32:01 PM
Germany announces host of new measures to bring down CO2

Quote
Niklas Höhne, founding partner of NewClimate Institute and a professor at Wageningen University, said the package “lack[ed] courage”.

“The new imperative is to aim for zero greenhouse gas emissions. But the package only collects individual measures to meet the short term target, without a clear vision how to phase out fossil fuels completely,” said Höhne.

Returning from climate protests in Berlin, which organisers said were attended by up to 250,000 people, Alexander Reitzenstein, an analyst with the think tank E3G, said the measures were a “disappointment… and piece-meal”.

“The proposed measures mark a clear progress,” Reitzenstein said. “It is however quite unlikely that they will be enough to reach the domestic and European climate targets, notwithstanding the need for more ambitious targets to contribute to limiting global warming to 1.5C.”

The scheme to spare drivers from the effects of increased carbon prices was “quite controversial because many argue it incentives to use the car and increases traffic …. and basically offsets the effect of carbon pricing.”

He added that the entry-level emissions rights in 2021 were set at an “extremely low price”. “It goes up quite early but it’s really low.”

Ottmar Edenhofer, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), agreed. “The grand coalition has not delivered on this central issue,” Edenhofer said in a statement.

Quote
“The price path [for the emissions trading scheme] is too low and does not extend far enough into the future to have a steering effect. By contrast, a sensible entry price is €50 per tonne of CO2 and rises to €130 by the end of the next decade, i.e. 2030. The carbon price should be the core instrument of climate policy, but now it only has an alibi function.”

Germany’s Fridays 4 Future group, which represents the student climate strike movement, dismissed the programme as “not my climate package”.

“It’s a bad joke when the federal government praises the pressure from #FridaysForFuture at the beginning of every statement and then wants to sell us decisions that further trample our future,” the campaign group tweeted.

https://www.climatechangenews.com/2019/09/20/germany-announces-host-new-measures-bring-co2/ (https://www.climatechangenews.com/2019/09/20/germany-announces-host-new-measures-bring-co2/)
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on September 21, 2019, 07:36:40 PM
Sound and fury: Merkel’s Climate Cabinet and its shortcomings

Germany is no longer a climate policy leader, dragging its feet in the face of increasing resistance from status-quo forces.

Quote
Despite increasing public pressure, both coalition parties within Merkel’s so-called Climate Cabinet favor taxes or market based trading schemes to tackle the climate crisis instead of new regulations to increase renewable energy or hard measures to phase out fossil fuels. L. Michael Buchsbaum takes a look

Quote
While the proposals now being considered include many incentives, he lamented the lack of legal requirements and actual regulations being proposed—something Merkel and her party have taken a strong stance against. Echoing the famous warning by another former German scientist, Albert Einstein that “we cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them,” Toepfer said that the state must make clear “that we can not solve the problems that the market economy has brought us through climate change with the market economy alone.”

Behind the ever growing sound and fury in Berlin is the fact that Germany is way behind on its climate efforts. Following the hottest summer in recorded history, ever more greenhouse gases continue to billow into the atmosphere from the nation’s filthy brown coal-fired power plants and tailpipes of its ever growing fleet of SUVs.

Quote
In elections throughout the year, the public has clearly showed its disapproval as the governing parties were punished and support for the more climate-focused Greens surged. Indeed, opinion polls now show that climate change has surpassed immigration as the German public’s primary concern. Nevertheless, the government has abandoned a self-imposed target to lower CO2 emissions by 40% from 1990 levels by next year as Germany risks missing its legally binding EU goals. Governing coalition partner SPD, which has been particularly hammered in recent elections, is additionally threatening to quit the coalition altogether and bring down the government with it if a climate package they approve isn’t passed.

Quote
Most assume that whatever plans are adopted will derail Merkel’s prized Black-zero balanced-budget if the government ended up footing the bill, which news outlets like the Sueddeutsche Zeitung report could stretch to as much as 50-75 billion euros.

Quote
Details around how exactly the new plans will boost the build out of renewable energy—which has cratered recently, are hard to find. Reviewing the debate from the sidelines, Green Party head Robert Habeck warned that none of these proposals are sufficient, “neither in speed nor in liability,” he said. “The most urgent action would be the coal exit. There has been a national consensus on this, now it’s time to implement it.” Instead, he says, the SPD may actually be fighting to open new mines and stall the phase-out of lignite. And neither party seems to be directly pushing for the expansion of renewable energy. Though plans to promote electric vehicles and replace old oil-heaters in buildings are all well and good, these measures are “not enough to prevent the environmental harms” that go on every day—and against which the public is largely rebelling. Despite the noise, as we come down to the finish line, fears are mounting that the Climate Cabinet’s proposals will actually signify nothing.

https://energytransition.org/2019/09/sound-and-fury-merkels-climate-cabinet-and-its-shortcomings/ (https://energytransition.org/2019/09/sound-and-fury-merkels-climate-cabinet-and-its-shortcomings/)
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on September 21, 2019, 09:43:32 PM
Gerontocrat, i have no doubts that you are a wise man. But now you are talking about a subject that is not your strongest subject to talk about. Because these illegals/refugees....have a very strong impact on our debt. Because our nominal debt keeps going up fast, even after hard savings. You have to know that we have 40 000 cases of family reunion a year, every year.  And on average they have between 3 and 4 children with them, almost 4. Each child gets 165 € a month, and low income families get 83 € extra for every child a month. And between 50 and 150 € extra for each child per month if the go to school. That's like 18000 € a year for one family , only for the children. That's like 600 million € a year. And that they have to find every year again. Ofcourse , everybody has the same rights. But most Belgians only have 1 or 2 children, and many have no children. And when they had to save 10 billion 4 years ago. They saved money from traditional government services, the police force, the fire fighters, the teachers.....They rised all kinds of taxes. And the result is that we now spend 20 billion a year more than 4 years ago. Because all the money they saved goes straight to these refugees and illegals. And much more than what we saved. It's a cost that comes out of nowhere. And it just keeps going up year after year. And now again they will have to save 12 billion. There are only 4 options, growth to get a bigger tax basis, higher taxes, more debt, or savings. But the growth is not so easy, not even after printing 4000 billion. And we already have the highest tax in the world on most things. And more debt, if you take public and private debt together. Than we are already the masters of the univers. Than the savings are left, but i don't think there are many people left that want to save. And the bills will keep flowing in faster and faster. Because many of these immigrants that are already here for many years. They now start to bring their parents to Belgium. And these people are already 60 + years old. And the number of family reunions gets bigger every year. You could say that the situation is out of control.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: be cause on September 21, 2019, 10:54:15 PM
  .. if Belgians are not making enough babies then they should be grateful to the 'illegals' for doing their work for them .. they will be glad of those 'illegal' children in a generation .. b.c.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: BeeKnees on September 21, 2019, 10:55:39 PM
German debt to GDP is still falling
Germany regularly runs a surplus
Germany's population was falling and aging in a similar manner to Japan.
Germany is at full employment according to standard economic measurements
  The immigrants who have come are and will continue to integrate, they will work and help support the aging population.
There is zero evidence that they are causing Germany to take on more debt that it can afford.
As others have said, borrowing to invest in the future and the wellbeing of the people is a good thing.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on September 22, 2019, 07:50:50 AM
The posts from Alexander555 on this subject have no basis in fact whatsoever.

Correct!

For Germany, it is necessary to have migration or else it's breaking down. We are dependent on a steady population number. If this number would go down, the social system would collapse. And without migration, the population would shrink.

Germany is in the heart of Europe. Migration is normal here dating back since humans are a thing. Migration here is the default state.

Only a racist mind would think this is somehow bad.

Being German means you live here and respect the Grundgesetz, not having blond hair and blue eyes.

Racists don't respect the Grundgesetz because they are inherently anti-democratic.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on September 22, 2019, 07:52:56 AM
German debt to GDP is still falling
Germany regularly runs a surplus
Germany's population was falling and aging in a similar manner to Japan.
Germany is at full employment according to standard economic measurements
  The immigrants who have come are and will continue to integrate, they will work and help support the aging population.
There is zero evidence that they are causing Germany to take on more debt that it can afford.
As others have said, borrowing to invest in the future and the wellbeing of the people is a good thing.

+1
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on September 22, 2019, 07:54:33 AM
  .. if Belgians are not making enough babies then they should be grateful to the 'illegals' for doing their work for them .. they will be glad of those 'illegal' children in a generation .. b.c.

Glad you put illegal into quotes, B.C.

No person is illegal!
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on September 22, 2019, 08:05:12 AM
Gerontocrat, i have no doubts that you are a wise man. But now you are talking about a subject that is not your strongest subject to talk about.

C'mon. I've never seen a single unique thought of yours. You only parrot the most stupid Nazi propaganda here. And you are the one telling others they are bad informed? You of all people? This is Kafkaesque!
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on September 22, 2019, 12:21:08 PM
  .. if Belgians are not making enough babies then they should be grateful to the 'illegals' for doing their work for them .. they will be glad of those 'illegal' children in a generation .. b.c.

I will give you an example. At my work, the company pays 50 000 € a year for me. From that 50 000 i get something like 20 000 €. But we have a very generous system. We have a tax system in layers. The first layer of 10 000 € is taxfree. And than it goes up by something like 10 000 € from 25 % to 50 % .And for every child you get 1 taxfree layer extra. My college, from Morroco, he has 4 children. So he don't has to pay taxes ont that 50 000. And he gets 18000 a year from childcare. And he managed that one of his children is not 100 % ok ( mentaly). From that he makes another 550 € a month. So he gets something like 74 000 € a year. Completely taxfree. And we have system that for every person that gets 1 € from the government, there has to be a person that pays 1 € to the government. These immigrants and refugees, illegals... They litterly squees the money out of the pockets of the rest. They just don't have money to get more children. Because they get robbed by the government every year more and more.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on September 22, 2019, 12:39:51 PM
Blumenkraft, it looks like Germany is in a recession already. And that after 4000 billion printed money. And last year i spend some time in Germany for a project. And what i noticed, most normal houses. They are divided in mulitple places. Because several people have their postadress at the same house. So you germans can not even afford your own house anymore. That's like in a third world country. They live with the entire family in one room .Robbed by all your illegals.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: SATire on September 22, 2019, 12:45:49 PM
I will give you an example. ... My college, from Morroco, he has 4 children. So he don't has to pay taxes ont that 50 000.
Lol - what is that example for? He is working, thus not illegal. He gets more money not because he is from Morocco but because he has more children. If you do not like that blame your government for being to social. Maybe vote for vlaams belang next time or the neo-liberals, in case you still can find some...

The term "illegal" is a local US term - it is not valid internationally for cases under convention of Geneva. 
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: BeeKnees on September 22, 2019, 12:49:19 PM
The agenda to demonise immigrants is clear.

Totally ignoring taxation of corporate profits that have been generated from having sufficient workers and the multiplier of government spending.

It's shameful.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on September 22, 2019, 12:56:37 PM
SATire: You don't understand what i say. Most arrive here with plenty children. So there is no point where they contribute something to that taxbasis they use. It's the people that contribute to that taxbasis that have to solve the problem. And that's the people that are already in that tax system. All the rest just falls from the sky. And if you look at many immigrants in these big cities. The shops they have, it's all blackmarket. They don't have an annual report. So again, they contribute nothing to that taxbasis. And we will have to safe 12 billion again, so that will be good for the Vlaams Belang. Because it's them who will have to pay for all your illegals.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on September 22, 2019, 01:01:50 PM
BeeKnees: I understand your viewpoint about these big corporations. That they hide their profits. But at least most of them already pay high taxes on their workers. It's not a blackmarket like most business in these immigrant infested places. Because most of them pay no taxes at all, just benefiting as much as they can.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on September 22, 2019, 01:07:53 PM
Get a grip of how the world works man. You are a shame for your country.

PS: But who cares, eh? The president is just the same...
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on September 22, 2019, 01:11:36 PM
I feel sorry for you germans.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: be cause on September 22, 2019, 01:23:03 PM
comment deleted .. not even worth the words . b.c.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on September 22, 2019, 01:36:06 PM
And these immigrants, illegals, refugees...they eat the taxbasis that pays most of you scientists.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: SATire on September 22, 2019, 01:39:22 PM
SATire: You don't understand what i say. Most arrive here with plenty children.
Alexander, I am German so I do understand very well what you say. It is Racism. Normally it is rated well to have many children - they can pay your social system once you are retired. But in case those children are not of "belgic blood" (does such a thing exist? you are a mixture of many people migrating there earlier)....
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: oren on September 22, 2019, 02:34:43 PM
Alexander, you could have 4 children and get the same 70,000. It doesn't have to do with being Moroccan or not, "illegal" or not. And in general I resent your racist/xenophobic undertones.

However, I do think that governments worldwide should not encourage large families (regardless whether "natives" or immigrants), as these are not sustainable on a global basis and are also a strain on a local basis. Most benefits (tax breaks, allowances) should go to the first child, which is also the most difficult to have and raise, both mentally and economically. For the second child there should be less benefits, and that's it. The benefit system that grows with each child (sometimes even more than linearly) can result in certain subcultures in a country that encourage to have more children at the public/government's expense, and over a generation these subcultures grow and have more political power thus reinforcing the benefits cycle.
In my country this is very obvious with the religious orthodox, with families that can even reach 15 children, and political power that is focused on long-term growth of the sector and maximal public money transfers. A similar situation arises with the Bedouin, where the father takes the benefits and maximizes number of children at the expense of the multiple wives (though bigamy is illegal workarounds are easily found when the subculture is so inclined). All this in a country that has one of the highest population densities in the world.
But the same logic applies in all countries - large families should be discouraged and small families of 1-2 children should be encouraged, with both economic incentives and public advisories. Most times it's also good for the country to encourage childless couples to have one child, who will probably get good attention and education.
So instead of raging against immigrants, you should lobby for making the benefits system more rational.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Yuha on September 22, 2019, 02:54:26 PM
Alexander, all children are a burden to the society until they grow up and start working and paying taxes.

Your Moroccan colleague, on the other hand, did not milk the Belgian society for his first 18 years or so. He came in and probably started working productively and paying taxes almost immediately. In that sense, he might be more profitable to Belgium than you are.

The extra benefits your colleague gets are not for him, they are for his children with the idea that they will pay that money back to the society later.

So the best thing, for Belgian society, is that those children get a good education, are well integrated into the society, and become productive, tax paying citizens.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on September 22, 2019, 03:07:52 PM
They will have to bring the system down anyway. Because it attracts to many people from all over the planet to benefit from it. And it only works as long there is somebody that pays 1 € for 1 € that somebody gets. It bankrupts the country for the moment. And we also have 80 000 people a year that enter the country with a workpermit. The taxes they have to pay are not as high. Nobody wants to pay these high taxes anymore. Just some leftwingers that don't pay taxes.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on September 22, 2019, 03:37:14 PM
your racist/xenophobic undertones.

... blatant racist/xenophobic attitude.

FIFY. :)
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on September 22, 2019, 04:12:59 PM
A couple years ago they lowered unemploymend benefits in Holland. I don't live far from the border. The city center here is flooded with dutch speaking africans. They just go after the highest benefits. But but but, we now have a very nice tool to avoid some taxes. And that's the chinese web shops. The quality is getting better fast, the price is only 25 % of the price over here. And we pay sales tax in China. So we don't have to contribute any longer to a system that is destroying itself.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on September 22, 2019, 04:20:45 PM
Alexander, you could have 4 children and get the same 70,000. It doesn't have to do with being Moroccan or not, "illegal" or not. And in general I resent your racist/xenophobic undertones.

However, I do think that governments worldwide should not encourage large families (regardless whether "natives" or immigrants), as these are not sustainable on a global basis and are also a strain on a local basis. Most benefits (tax breaks, allowances) should go to the first child, which is also the most difficult to have and raise, both mentally and economically. For the second child there should be less benefits, and that's it. The benefit system that grows with each child (sometimes even more than linearly) can result in certain subcultures in a country that encourage to have more children at the public/government's expense, and over a generation these subcultures grow and have more political power thus reinforcing the benefits cycle.
In my country this is very obvious with the religious orthodox, with families that can even reach 15 children, and political power that is focused on long-term growth of the sector and maximal public money transfers. A similar situation arises with the Bedouin, where the father takes the benefits and maximizes number of children at the expense of the multiple wives (though bigamy is illegal workarounds are easily found when the subculture is so inclined). All this in a country that has one of the highest population densities in the world.
But the same logic applies in all countries - large families should be discouraged and small families of 1-2 children should be encouraged, with both economic incentives and public advisories. Most times it's also good for the country to encourage childless couples to have one child, who will probably get good attention and education.
So instead of raging against immigrants, you should lobby for making the benefits system more rational.

So you think we can all get 70 000 € a year taxfree ? You have to understand that 50 000 € , comes from the government. Because normaly he would only make 20 000 a year. And that is already plenty for that job compared to other countries. We do have some skills, but no diploma. That money is also under pressure. Because now many people import workers, to avoid these taxes. I think they get taxed in their homecountry, or at the rate of their homecountry. That can easily make  20 000 € a year difference. That's 20 000 € pure profit for the person that imports them.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: SATire on September 22, 2019, 05:53:55 PM
Alexander, I agree that we should have harmonized tax system in EU and elsewhere. The current situation is often like robbery - small countries suck from large ones with a bit of profit and large damage for others.

But those tax systems are not robbery by people, because the people do not make such laws. It is your government to blame, not the person from e.g. Marocco. Freedom of people to move is larger value than freedom of money to move or goods. So globalization should first be beneficial for the people and 2nd for companies. That is also the simple EU rule.

Now we also have global warming - caused by rich northern countries and resulting in first damages in more southern countries. How can we not help them if they have real problems, like e.g. a gay person in Morocco or just any person in Syria, who is attacked from all sides?

If immigrants work on black markets or do illegal things your police/customs/tax officers should do their job. Again blame your government if they ignore such problems - but not generally people from other countries. If you do so please also blame all Belgians for any problem caused by one single Belgian. 

But now this thread should maybe get back to problems caused by Germany, as mentioned in the title. And such problems are plentiful and often related to CO2: No other country spent that much money for such little effect. Just because we like to give the money but do not like to abstain from consumption. Please feel free to learn from our huge mistake.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: BeeKnees on September 22, 2019, 06:14:56 PM
BeeKnees: I understand your viewpoint about these big corporations.

You really don't.
The point is that people working and earning or receiving benefits generate work for others, they spend money on goods and services that generate turnover for other companies and profits for the corporations who in turn pay corporation taxes that feed back into the system. 
Money doesn't stop at one person, regardless of background.  It flows on to the next and feeds back to government to pay taxes.  Governments dont need taxes to spend, they need taxes to control the flow of money. 

Your view that immigration is inherently financially bad and causing economic collapse is provably false and in my opinion is based on prejudice rather than fact.  In my experience the desire to avoid taxes is not an immigrant or local resident thing.  It's based on greed and wealth, with the wealthiest being far more likely to shift sums to tax havens and hide income than the poorest.
At least when a low income person avoids tax they will still have spent the money within the economy, generating tax returns further down the line, unlike those who hide the money indefinitely and to everyones detriment,
 
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on September 23, 2019, 12:08:57 AM
Please start another thread, maybe call it "But, but, but immigrants" and allow this one to be about the climate policies of, and progress/lack of progress in emission reductions, of Germany.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Florifulgurator on September 23, 2019, 03:05:17 AM
Neues Wort (new wörd): Klimapillepallekanzlerin.

6/2019:
https://youtu.be/5dyUcVuVQOk

und jetzt (and now):
"Gute Nacht (good night), Klima-Kanzlerin!"
http://www.tagesschau.de/kommentar/klimakanzlerin-merkel-ende-101.html
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on December 05, 2019, 04:04:44 PM
Never thought i'd live long enough to actually experience it, but here we go! \o/

Germany's Social Democrats Are Moving Left. Will it Save the Party?

As you can imagine the mainstream media doesn't like the move left. But this is IMHO the only possibility for them to survive. And the further left the better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zH92UKx-bKA

Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Alexander555 on December 05, 2019, 06:16:41 PM
What surprises me a little bit about "mutti" is that she's not spending one worth on these concentration camps in China. Because it's not just a little issue, 1,5 million people. Many never return home. And still they are Germany's big friends. So germany is not that left at all, still the same radicals as 80 years ago. The only thing that has changed is the colour of their shirts. From braun and black, to red with some green on it. To let it look better.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on December 05, 2019, 06:50:46 PM
How do you get the impression Germany's government is left?

Merkel is CDU which is the right-wing party here. And she is coalising with the centre-right SPD.

If - and this is a very big if - the SPD moves left now due to the new heads of the party, this would locate them centre-left. Wouldn't make the government awfully left-wing either.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on January 12, 2020, 11:19:10 AM
Das is cool!

Learn German vocabulary by reading in your native language !!

https://home.language-mate.com
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: NeilT on January 12, 2020, 07:34:01 PM
One countries centre right is another's center left.

UK PM Clement Atlee, UK centre left Labour Party, was aked what the American parties were like in ideology.

He replied.

The Republicans are their right wing party and are very much like our Conservatives. The Democrats are their more centre party and they are very like our Conservatives...

You have to know an awful lot more about a country than the label on their party before you understand where they stand in relation to your own politics.

The SPD might want to take pause and view Jeremy Corbyn's "lurch to the left" and how it served his party in the last election.

They returned their worst results since 1935.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on January 12, 2020, 09:04:22 PM
An excellent take on things NeilT! I always have to remind myself to reorient my brain around the meaning of "progressive", "conservative", "communist", "liberal", "right wing" from country to country - and from one era to another. "Socialist" Corbyn would have been mainstream in the UK 1970s for example. For those in the ex-Soviet countries the changes must have been quite disorienting.

Then of course there are the non-liberal neo-liberals, and the so-called "capitalist democracy" that seems to be able to mean anything that is capitalist, and of course the "anti-semite" slur that really means "supports the Palestinians" (as against real anti-semites who are ignorant bigots). Sometimes I feel like I live in a propaganda masterclass with a shade of 1984 ("war is peace!"), seems to get worse every time I watch a bit of the mainstream media.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on January 13, 2020, 06:02:23 AM
Actually, it's a wrong take IMHO!

We can boil the political forces into two, no matter where you are in the west. One is democratic and wants more power to the people, and the other one is autocratic, wanting the power to stay in the hands of the rich by pursuing neoliberal politics.

Quote
The Republicans are their right wing party and are very much like our Conservatives. The Democrats are their more centre party and they are very like our Conservatives...

They are both status quo parties. They are both autocratic.

Quote
The SPD might want to take pause and view Jeremy Corbyn's "lurch to the left" and how it served his party in the last election.

The SPD is suffering because they took Germany into war, and cut social security, and sold us out to the rich. They are taking the hit for their neoliberal politics.

Corbyn took the hit because he's an utter moron for being a Brexit guy. Also, he was the target of defamation campaigns from the ones in power.

Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on January 13, 2020, 06:53:41 AM
Sadly, I have to agree about Corbyn being an utter moron with respect to Brexit. Deeply sad, given that it probably blew a chance for the true progressives for many years to come.The defamation campaign was despicable, but the Brexit error was what really counted.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: NeilT on January 13, 2020, 01:30:29 PM

The SPD is suffering because they took Germany into war, and cut social security, and sold us out to the rich. They are taking the hit for their neoliberal politics.


You see this is the difference between countries.  Those things you just mentioned are right of centre  in the UK.  Neoliberalism, in the UK, is considered left of centre.


Corbyn took the hit because he's an utter moron for being a Brexit guy. Also, he was the target of defamation campaigns from the ones in power.

Corbyn is so far left he is virtually communist. Even British working class don't like communism.

Rboyd, Corbyn wasn't so much defamed as put under a spotlight.  British Labour voters consider him a traitor to the country.  Part way through the campaign he realised that British working class did not associate spending bucket loads of cash on nationalising stuff as actually "doing" something for them.  So his spin team came up with the idea of giving free Internet once they had renationalised telecom.

Unfortunately for Corbyn, British education changes really have produced a nation who can think and question, so they thought about who actually pays for government, especially after the Government just got rid of a whole raft of companies running utilities and asked themselves just how much their "free" Internet would cost.

Corbyn also got it totally wrong on Brexit.  He should have been as convincing as possible that he would have taken the UK out of the EU. That was his only option to cripple the Tories.  Instead he decided to try and steal the Liberal vote by claiming he would kill brexit by the back door.

Liberals really don't like Trotskyites.  Well not in the UK anyway.

At the same time the Liberals, who promised to ignore the people's vote and void the referendum result, were crushed with their leader losing her Scottish seat.

If you want to see how Corbyn would have been received in the 70's and 80's, it is worth reading up on how Labour dealt with Militant.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militant_(Trotskyist_group)

It is interesting to see the differing views though
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on January 13, 2020, 01:38:24 PM
Neoliberalism, in the UK, is considered left of centre.

Neoliberalism is by default autocratic and therefore not at all left. Far away from anything left, actually.

Words have meanings and if we don't use the words for what they actually mean, we are opening the doors for all kinds of manipulations.

Just as they manipulated you into the belief neoliberal politics are not autocratic and harmful for society.



Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: kassy on January 13, 2020, 01:58:43 PM
re 125 above.

Would it not be better to state:
One side poses as democratic and wanting more power to the people.

We do not really have 2 sides anymore just different ´accents´ which are PR in the middle and extremer groups mostly too the right but they are populist not democratic.

We experimented with some things like an election for mayors so when the day game in Utrecht we could choose between two guys from the same party. Less then 10% of people voted and a huge part of those votes were not legal so this experiment with more power to the people failed.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: NeilT on January 13, 2020, 05:12:33 PM
[

Neoliberalism is by default autocratic and therefore not at all left. Far away from anything left, actually.

Apologies, should have read that.

So reading the blurb on it, neoliberalism doesn't exist.  Thatcherism is hard core Conservatism.  This is something that Libaleralism stands against.

God knows how they got that name.  If SPD are hard conservative, I can see that moving left into the middle ground might benefit them.

Blair showed that one. He is the only Labour leader to win an election in the last 45 years. He did it from the centre ground after standing on all left leaning members.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: rboyd on January 15, 2020, 07:28:33 AM
Liberalism tends to believe in laissez faire - leaving the markets alone to function. Neoliberalism believes in the role of the state to construct markets through state action - through such things as deregulation, privatization, removing the "restrictive practices" of unions (e.g. the miners in the UK), cutting capital gains taxes, cutting "inefficient" benefits that stop the free market from working its magic, forcing other countries to deregulate and privatize etc.

Democracy is not required, autocracy is fine. The first real test was that of the "Chicago Boys" in Pinochet's Chile in the 1970s. Within a few years the state had to bail things out. The hidden neoliberal reality, "risk taking entrepreneurs" have to be regularly bailed out by the state.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: Ken Feldman on January 16, 2020, 12:58:19 AM
The last solar auction for 2019 in Germany was oversubscribed.

https://www.renewablesnow.com/news/avg-surcharge-at-eur-568mwh-in-oversubscribed-solar-tender-in-germany-683582/ (https://www.renewablesnow.com/news/avg-surcharge-at-eur-568mwh-in-oversubscribed-solar-tender-in-germany-683582/)

Quote
January 15 (Renewables Now) - The last solar tender for 2019 in Germany, held on December 1, aimed to award 500 MW of capacity and got bids for 1,344 MW.

Quote
In geographical terms, most of the new solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity from the December tender will be installed in the states of Bavaria (148 MW), Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania (80 MW) and Schleswig-Holstein (49 MW).

The next tender for solar power is scheduled for February 1.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: kassy on May 01, 2020, 11:52:57 AM
How Dying Forests and a Swedish Teenager Helped Revive Germany's Clean Energy Revolution

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/24042020/germany-energy-renewables-solar-wind-climate-change-warming

Long article on the recent changes in climate policy in Germany.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on May 01, 2020, 12:18:54 PM
Almost a 10 points jump in renewables this year vs. last year in Germany. I can't yet interpret how to weight reduced demand and the good weather conditions, but some adding renewables to the grid must have taken place.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: GoSouthYoungins on May 01, 2020, 07:08:49 PM
Here's the 2016 version...

Don't anyone dream of posting an odd numbered year's chart.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: kassy on May 01, 2020, 11:23:06 PM
How is 2018 US energy consumption relevant for Germany?
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on July 28, 2020, 07:52:35 PM
Germany: Fox steals over 100 shoes in Berlin

Link >> https://www.dw.com/en/berlin-fox-steals-shoes/a-54330292
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on August 02, 2020, 10:52:06 AM
Far-right extremist [sleeper] cells are everywhere. In the army, in the police, in reservist units.

Quote
Neo-Nazi groups and other extremists call it Day X — a mythical moment when Germany’s social order collapses, requiring committed far-right extremists, in their telling, to save themselves and rescue the nation. German authorities consider the scenario a pretext for a takeover of the government. “I fear we’ve only seen the tip of the iceberg.” There is infiltration of the very institutions, like the police, that are supposed to be investigating them. Members are often from former East Germany. They had already seen one system collapse. “It’s an advantage.” One group kept binders of names of people to be rounded up, taken away and shot. The "people file". Body bags and quick lime were purchased.

Compact, a prominent far-right magazine, with President Trump’s face on the cover, lay on a shelf. A selection of the president’s speeches had been translated into German in the issue. “I like Trump,” Mr. Gross said [a far-right member]. “The deep state is global,” Mr. Gross said. “It’s big capital, the big banks, Bill Gates." He still expects Day X, sooner or later. Riots linked to an economic meltdown. Or a blackout, because the German government is shuttering coal plants.

Link >> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/01/world/europe/germany-nazi-infiltration.html

Mirror >> https://web.archive.org/web/20200801091037/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/01/world/europe/germany-nazi-infiltration.html
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: blumenkraft on August 03, 2020, 02:45:30 PM
As Neo-Nazis Seed Military Ranks, Germany Confronts ‘an Enemy Within’

Quote
CALW, Germany — As Germany emerged from its coronavirus lockdown in May, police commandos pulled up outside a rural property owned by a sergeant major in the special forces, the country’s most highly trained and secretive military unit.

They brought a digger.

The sergeant major’s nickname was Little Sheep. He was suspected of being a neo-Nazi. Buried in the garden, the police found two kilograms of PETN plastic explosives, a detonator, a fuse, an AK-47, a silencer, two knives, a crossbow and thousands of rounds of ammunition, much of it believed to have been stolen from the German military.

They also found an SS songbook, 14 editions of a magazine for former members of the Waffen SS and a host of other Nazi memorabilia.

“He had a plan,” said Eva Högl, Germany’s parliamentary commissioner for the armed forces. “And he is not the only one.”

Germany has a problem. For years, politicians and security chiefs rejected the notion of any far-right infiltration of the security services, speaking only of “individual cases.” The idea of networks was dismissed. The superiors of those exposed as extremists were protected. Guns and ammunition disappeared from military stockpiles with no real investigation.

The government is now waking up. Cases of far-right extremists in the military and the police, some hoarding weapons and explosives, have multiplied alarmingly. The nation’s top intelligence officials and senior military commanders are moving to confront an issue that has become too dangerous to ignore.
...

This week, Germany’s defense minister, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, took the drastic step of disbanding a fighting company in the KSK considered infested with extremists. Little Sheep, the sergeant major whose weapons stash was uncovered in May, was a member.

Some 48,000 rounds of ammunition and 62 kilograms, or about 137 pounds, of explosives have disappeared from the KSK altogether, she said.
...

But the German authorities are concerned that the problem may be far larger and that other security institutions have been infiltrated as well. Over the past 13 months, far-right terrorists have assassinated a politician, attacked a synagogue and shot dead nine immigrants and German descendants of immigrants.

Thomas Haldenwang, president of Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, has identified far-right extremism and terrorism as the “biggest danger to German democracy today.”
...

In many cases, soldiers have used the networks to prepare for when they predict Germany’s democratic order will collapse. They call it Day X. Officials worry it is really a pretext for inciting terrorist acts, or worse, a putsch.

“For far-right extremists, the preparation of Day X and its precipitation blend into one another,” Martina Renner, a lawmaker on the homeland security committee of the German Parliament, told me.

The ties, officials say, sometimes reach deep into old neo-Nazi networks and the more polished intellectual scene of the so-called New Right. Extremists are hoarding weapons, maintaining safe houses, and in some cases keeping lists of political enemies.
...

Some German news media have referred to a “shadow army,” drawing parallels to the 1920s, when nationalist cells within the military hoarded arms, plotted coups and conspired to overthrow democracy.
...

Once they really started looking, they found a lot of cases,” said Konstantin von Notz, deputy president of the intelligence oversight committee in the German Parliament. “When you have hundreds of individual cases it begins to look like we have a structural problem. It is extremely worrying.”
...

I would estimate the number of soldiers in European armed forces that also belong to nationalist groups to number in the hundreds of thousands, with just as many employed in law enforcement positions,” Mr. Tarrant had written.

Investigators, Mr. von Notz said, “should take these words seriously.”

But investigating the problem is itself fraught: Even the military counterintelligence agency, charged with monitoring extremism inside the armed forces, may be infiltrated.
...

If the very people who are meant to protect our democracy are plotting against it, we have a big problem,” said Stephan Kramer, president of the domestic intelligence agency in the state of Thuringia. “How do you find them?”
...

“What we are dealing with is an enemy within.”
...

“Day X is personal,” he said. “For one guy it’s this day, for another guy it’s another day.”

‘‘It’s the day you activate your plans,” he said.
...

He denies ever planning to bring about Day X, but he is still convinced that it will come, maybe sooner rather than later with the pandemic.
...

The New Right, which encompasses youth activists, intellectuals and the AfD, worries General Kreitmayr. The lawmaker whose anti-Semitic comments led to General Günzel’s firing all those years ago now sits in the German Parliament for the AfD.

“You have leading representatives of political parties like the AfD, who say things that not only make you sick but that are clearly far-right, radical ideology,” General Kreitmayr said.

Soldiers were not immune to this cultural shift in the country, he said. Just recently a fellow general had become a mayoral candidate for the AfD. Several former soldiers represent the party in Parliament.
...

Link >> https://outline.com/VsWpDH (NYT article)
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: kassy on August 03, 2020, 06:58:47 PM
As this subforum is for AGW those last two articles should probably be reposted below.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: nanning on August 10, 2020, 12:04:46 PM
A beautiful initiative to save victims of AGW&violence. These humans have a conscience and high morality  :-*
German Protestant church to send migrant rescue boat to Mediterranean
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/06/german-protestant-church-to-send-migrant-rescue-boat-to-mediterranean
  by Lorenzo Tondo in Palermo

 excerpts:
The German Protestant church will send a ship to the central Mediterranean to rescue migrants attempting to reach Europe from north Africa.

The mission, managed by United4Rescue – an initiative led by the Protestant church in Germany (EKD) and backed by more than 500 other organisations – is the result of a crowdfunding campaign launched a few months ago named #WirSchickenEinSchiff (“We send a ship”).

“We connect all social organisations and groups that do not want to stand by and watch thousands of people die in the Mediterranean,” United4Rescue says on its website.

One does not let any single human drown, end of discussion,” the head of EKD, Heinrich Bedford-Strohm, said during the ceremony. “This ship has to be out there, because European states do not intend, nor do they manage, to rescue people in the Mediterranean.”

“However, the ship is not only a rescue asset, but also a strong political statement against Europe’s deadly politics. It is a huge 60.8-metre sign of solidarity, sent by over 500 organisations, of civil society, with the church in the front row. It demonstrates that civil society, in Europe, disagrees with the fact that governments choose to let people drown, instead of allowing them to arrive at Europe’s shores.

The mission will also be joined by Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF).

“No human being should be left to drown, to sink beneath the waves. No human being should be forced to endure torture and suffering. Yet this is the consequence of criminal dereliction of duty by European governments,” said Oliver Behn, MSF director of operations.
Title: Re: But, but, but Germany ....
Post by: be cause on August 10, 2020, 03:18:48 PM
A thousand 'loves' .. but one 'like' must suffice .. <3 b.c.