Germany Generated 74 Percent Of Power Needs From Renewable Energy

[Shrimpbox]

As one who is not at all versed on the inside baseball of green energy, let me forward a hypothesis about how regular people see this. I believe everyone wants to do what is right for the planet, but the pace of technology is so fast that many of us fear any of these new systems will be obsolete before they are done being installed. Batteries are getting better every day(or so we are being told), solar efficiency is increasing every day(or so we are being told), and fusion is right around the corner negating any need for the previous two. Windmills are killing a lot of birds and don't seem to have to follow the same environmental protocols oil companies or fishermen do when it comes to the environment. Remember that oil soaked pelican during the bp oil spill? What if someone showed a tractor trailer sized mound of dead birds that the windmills did in?

so many regular people say I think I will just wait a bit. Solyndra and the new governor of Virginia make a lot of us think this is just another scam to get our money in the name of the world coming to an end, again. Please forgive us our ignorance.

 

[Pogo]

Windmills are killing a lot of birds and don't seem to have to follow the same environmental protocols oil companies or fishermen do when it comes to the environment. Remember that oil soaked pelican during the bp oil spill? What if someone showed a tractor trailer sized mound of dead birds that the windmills did in?

For the curious it's not hard to find this stuff out. How much is "a lot"? Some perspective:


Man-made structure/technology -- Associated bird deaths per year (U.S.)

Feral and domestic cats ---- Hundreds of millions [source: AWEA]
Power lines ---- 130 million to 174 million [source: AWEA]
Windows (residential and commercial) --- 100 million to 1 billion [source: TreeHugger]
Pesticides -- 70 million [source: AWEA]
Automobiles --- 60 million to 80 million [source: AWEA]
Lighted communication towers -- 40 million to 50 million [source: AWEA]
Wind turbines ---- 10,000 to 40,000 [source: ABC]

>> Collisions with wind turbines account for about one-tenth of a percent of all "unnatural" bird deaths in the United States each year. << (table and text from this page)

No, wind turbines are not subject to the same environmental regulations as oil -- of course not. They don't pollute. That's the whole point. That, and not needing fuel.

 

[flacaltenn]

Windmills are killing a lot of birds and don't seem to have to follow the same environmental protocols oil companies or fishermen do when it comes to the environment. Remember that oil soaked pelican during the bp oil spill? What if someone showed a tractor trailer sized mound of dead birds that the windmills did in?

For the curious it's not hard to find this stuff out. How much is "a lot"? Some perspective:


Man-made structure/technology -- Associated bird deaths per year (U.S.)

Feral and domestic cats ---- Hundreds of millions [source: AWEA]
Power lines ---- 130 million to 174 million [source: AWEA]
Windows (residential and commercial) --- 100 million to 1 billion [source: TreeHugger]
Pesticides -- 70 million [source: AWEA]
Automobiles --- 60 million to 80 million [source: AWEA]
Lighted communication towers -- 40 million to 50 million [source: AWEA]
Wind turbines ---- 10,000 to 40,000 [source: ABC]

>> Collisions with wind turbines account for about one-tenth of a percent of all "unnatural" bird deaths in the United States each year. << (table and text from this page)

No, wind turbines are not subject to the same environmental regulations as oil -- of course not. They don't pollute. That's the whole point. That, and not needing fuel.

Of course the Amer. Wind Energy Assoc is gonna scurry away from the real enviro issue here. Buildings do not deny SPECIFIC TERRITORIAL species habitat. In fact, many species adapt quite well to urban/suburban settings. In the case of wind farms, we are not talking about birds drunk on berry juice colliding with objects, we are talking about Species that die at a such a rate from the location of these farms that essentially the area around these locations are denied as habitat. TERRITORIAL species like hawks, owls, bats, eagles...

You can just take a map and X out the territory for those species within several miles of a windfarm.. A random migratory warbler or wren hitting a window is NOT denial of habitat.

 

[Pogo]

Windmills are killing a lot of birds and don't seem to have to follow the same environmental protocols oil companies or fishermen do when it comes to the environment. Remember that oil soaked pelican during the bp oil spill? What if someone showed a tractor trailer sized mound of dead birds that the windmills did in?

For the curious it's not hard to find this stuff out. How much is "a lot"? Some perspective:


Man-made structure/technology -- Associated bird deaths per year (U.S.)

Feral and domestic cats ---- Hundreds of millions [source: AWEA]
Power lines ---- 130 million to 174 million [source: AWEA]
Windows (residential and commercial) --- 100 million to 1 billion [source: TreeHugger]
Pesticides -- 70 million [source: AWEA]
Automobiles --- 60 million to 80 million [source: AWEA]
Lighted communication towers -- 40 million to 50 million [source: AWEA]
Wind turbines ---- 10,000 to 40,000 [source: ABC]

>> Collisions with wind turbines account for about one-tenth of a percent of all "unnatural" bird deaths in the United States each year. << (table and text from this page)

No, wind turbines are not subject to the same environmental regulations as oil -- of course not. They don't pollute. That's the whole point. That, and not needing fuel.

Of course the Amer. Wind Energy Assoc is gonna scurry away from the real enviro issue here. Buildings do not deny SPECIFIC TERRITORIAL species habitat. In fact, many species adapt quite well to urban/suburban settings. In the case of wind farms, we are not talking about birds drunk on berry juice colliding with objects, we are talking about Species that die at a such a rate from the location of these farms that essentially the area around these locations are denied as habitat. TERRITORIAL species like hawks, owls, bats, eagles...

You can just take a map and X out the territory for those species within several miles of a windfarm.. A random migratory warbler or wren hitting a window is NOT denial of habitat.

Fair point (assuming it is a point-- no link) but the same question of perspective presents, to wit: how much denial of habitat do we continue to visit upon such species by clearing land, building factories and constructing the aforementioned urban/suburban settings? Put that in relation to the whole.

I would also submit that among my list linked above there are species-specific factors besides wind turbines, e.g. pesticides.

 

[elektra]

Sure, Germany produced Green Energy, but did it deliver that energy to the market? Doubtful.

On a day when not much energy was needed, Green Energy can claim to produce 70% of demand, on an easy day. Not a hard winter day when demand is high.

So Green Energy produced energy, big deal, the Coal Plants continued to operate, the natural gas plants continued to operate, they had to, to provide for the energy needed after the brief spike, what was it, a ten second spike?

How did they smooth out the energy spike caused by Green Energy, they used fossil fuels, computers, loads to dissipate the green energy spike.

Spikes are essentially a waste of energy, they have to go somewhere, where does that spike go? It gets shunted to ground.

Germany is suffering, just wait and see, lets see if Europe climbs out of the recession of the last 6 years. I would bet money after the election in 2016, we will somehow find the world's economy in a deep depression as the truth about the extreme cost of Green Energy comes to light.

 

[flacaltenn]

For the curious it's not hard to find this stuff out. How much is "a lot"? Some perspective:


Man-made structure/technology -- Associated bird deaths per year (U.S.)

Feral and domestic cats ---- Hundreds of millions [source: AWEA]
Power lines ---- 130 million to 174 million [source: AWEA]
Windows (residential and commercial) --- 100 million to 1 billion [source: TreeHugger]
Pesticides -- 70 million [source: AWEA]
Automobiles --- 60 million to 80 million [source: AWEA]
Lighted communication towers -- 40 million to 50 million [source: AWEA]
Wind turbines ---- 10,000 to 40,000 [source: ABC]

>> Collisions with wind turbines account for about one-tenth of a percent of all "unnatural" bird deaths in the United States each year. << (table and text from this page)

No, wind turbines are not subject to the same environmental regulations as oil -- of course not. They don't pollute. That's the whole point. That, and not needing fuel.

Of course the Amer. Wind Energy Assoc is gonna scurry away from the real enviro issue here. Buildings do not deny SPECIFIC TERRITORIAL species habitat. In fact, many species adapt quite well to urban/suburban settings. In the case of wind farms, we are not talking about birds drunk on berry juice colliding with objects, we are talking about Species that die at a such a rate from the location of these farms that essentially the area around these locations are denied as habitat. TERRITORIAL species like hawks, owls, bats, eagles...

You can just take a map and X out the territory for those species within several miles of a windfarm.. A random migratory warbler or wren hitting a window is NOT denial of habitat.

Fair point (assuming it is a point-- no link) but the same question of perspective presents, to wit: how much denial of habitat do we continue to visit upon such species by clearing land, building factories and constructing the aforementioned urban/suburban settings? Put that in relation to the whole.

I would also submit that among my list linked above there are species-specific factors besides wind turbines, e.g. pesticides.

Just want to be fair and not hypocritical. POWER PLANTS should be licensed by similiar rules and impacts. Agriculture is largely grandfathered in. And we are not granting waivers to farmers to go ahead and kill hundreds of our National Symbol Bald Eagles.

Raptors and bats are generally not harmed by other types of power plants. Other than power line issues which are present in BOTH cases. NON-territorial birds are not an issue with wind kills because they relocate often and the population is mobile. Not true in these other cases. It's not the absolute number of kills that matters here. It's the licensing and use of the land that PRECLUDES any meaningful mitigation to denial of habitat.

It APPEARS that wind farms may be required to mitigate this issue because of public pressure and they are experimenting with actual RADAR systems that give enough warning to shut all or a few turbines down before a collision. But that's a huge cost to swallow if it were to be REQUIRED of every large farm operator. Nothing else seems to work. In fact, these predators are ATTRACTED to the turbines because of the enhanced rodent population at the bases.

Its all land use and licensing. And nobody should be exempt. Oil companies just this past year were tried and fined for Eagle kills.. Fair is fair.. Exemptions make REAL enviros mad..

 

[Pogo]

Of course the Amer. Wind Energy Assoc is gonna scurry away from the real enviro issue here. Buildings do not deny SPECIFIC TERRITORIAL species habitat. In fact, many species adapt quite well to urban/suburban settings. In the case of wind farms, we are not talking about birds drunk on berry juice colliding with objects, we are talking about Species that die at a such a rate from the location of these farms that essentially the area around these locations are denied as habitat. TERRITORIAL species like hawks, owls, bats, eagles...

You can just take a map and X out the territory for those species within several miles of a windfarm.. A random migratory warbler or wren hitting a window is NOT denial of habitat.

Fair point (assuming it is a point-- no link) but the same question of perspective presents, to wit: how much denial of habitat do we continue to visit upon such species by clearing land, building factories and constructing the aforementioned urban/suburban settings? Put that in relation to the whole.

I would also submit that among my list linked above there are species-specific factors besides wind turbines, e.g. pesticides.

Just want to be fair and not hypocritical. POWER PLANTS should be licensed by similiar rules and impacts. Agriculture is largely grandfathered in. And we are not granting waivers to farmers to go ahead and kill hundreds of our National Symbol Bald Eagles.

Raptors and bats are generally not harmed by other types of power plants. Other than power line issues which are present in BOTH cases. NON-territorial birds are not an issue with wind kills because they relocate often and the population is mobile. Not true in these other cases. It's not the absolute number of kills that matters here. It's the licensing and use of the land that PRECLUDES any meaningful mitigation to denial of habitat.

It APPEARS that wind farms may be required to mitigate this issue because of public pressure and they are experimenting with actual RADAR systems that give enough warning to shut all or a few turbines down before a collision. But that's a huge cost to swallow if it were to be REQUIRED of every large farm operator. Nothing else seems to work. In fact, these predators are ATTRACTED to the turbines because of the enhanced rodent population at the bases.

Its all land use and licensing. And nobody should be exempt. Oil companies just this past year were tried and fined for Eagle kills.. Fair is fair.. Exemptions make REAL enviros mad..

To be a truly fair comparison you can't limit the observation to power generation only. The table I originally linked gives a perspective on what we're already doing in terms of bird kills, in other area. Not related area maybe, but the numbers clearly show the original sentiment, "Windmills are killing a lot of birds" is being purveyed out of its context. That is, overemphasized in the big picture; if 40,000 is "a lot", how are we to describe 174 million?

Nobody should be exempt from responsibility for their environmental impact, of course not. My point was that wind turbines simply do not require the pollution standards that oil or coal plants do, because such pollution simply isn't present. A statement of the obvious perhaps, but in response to that point in the post.

Again the point is all about perspective. What kind of hazards are already posed by existing technology and man-made structure on said raptors and bats? I don't know the answer to that but absent that context there is no perspective in which to plunk the wind turbine effect. IOW we don't know what its value is. We don't know the answer to "is that a lot?". So I'm not entirely satisfied with "Windmills are killing a lot of birds", especially given the inevitable political demagoguery that doggedly overemphasizes here and underemphasizes there depending on which approach serves its interest.

And it just seems a wee bit disingenuous to only suddenly discover denial of habitat with wind technology after we've been doing it so long with other stuff.

 

[Bleipriester]

.
Germany Sets New Record, Generating 74 Percent Of Power Needs From Renewable Energy

By Kiley Kroh
May 13, 2014

On Sunday, Germany’s impressive streak of renewable energy milestones continued, with renewable energy generation surging to a record portion — nearly 75 percent — of the country’s overall electricity demand by midday. With wind and solar in particular filling such a huge portion of the country’s power demand, electricity prices actually dipped into the negative for much of the afternoon, according to Renewables International.

In the first quarter of 2014, renewable energy sources met a record 27 percent of the country’s electricity demand, thanks to additional installations and favorable weather. “Renewable generators produced 40.2 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity, up from 35.7 billion kilowatt-hours in the same period last year,” Bloomberg reported. Much of the country’s renewable energy growth has occurred in the past decade and, as a point of comparison, Germany’s 27 percent is double the approximately 13 percent of U.S. electricity supply powered by renewables as of November 2013.

Observers say the records will keep coming as Germany continues its Energiewende, or energy transformation, which aims to power the country almost entirely on renewable sources by 2050.

<snip>
.

You probably won´t believe it but these are bad news for the German Green Party

 

[Statistikhengst]

Fair point (assuming it is a point-- no link) but the same question of perspective presents, to wit: how much denial of habitat do we continue to visit upon such species by clearing land, building factories and constructing the aforementioned urban/suburban settings? Put that in relation to the whole.

I would also submit that among my list linked above there are species-specific factors besides wind turbines, e.g. pesticides.

Just want to be fair and not hypocritical. POWER PLANTS should be licensed by similiar rules and impacts. Agriculture is largely grandfathered in. And we are not granting waivers to farmers to go ahead and kill hundreds of our National Symbol Bald Eagles.

Raptors and bats are generally not harmed by other types of power plants. Other than power line issues which are present in BOTH cases. NON-territorial birds are not an issue with wind kills because they relocate often and the population is mobile. Not true in these other cases. It's not the absolute number of kills that matters here. It's the licensing and use of the land that PRECLUDES any meaningful mitigation to denial of habitat.

It APPEARS that wind farms may be required to mitigate this issue because of public pressure and they are experimenting with actual RADAR systems that give enough warning to shut all or a few turbines down before a collision. But that's a huge cost to swallow if it were to be REQUIRED of every large farm operator. Nothing else seems to work. In fact, these predators are ATTRACTED to the turbines because of the enhanced rodent population at the bases.

Its all land use and licensing. And nobody should be exempt. Oil companies just this past year were tried and fined for Eagle kills.. Fair is fair.. Exemptions make REAL enviros mad..

To be a truly fair comparison you can't limit the observation to power generation only. The table I originally linked gives a perspective on what we're already doing in terms of bird kills, in other area. Not related area maybe, but the numbers clearly show the original sentiment, "Windmills are killing a lot of birds" is being purveyed out of its context. That is, overemphasized in the big picture; if 40,000 is "a lot", how are we to describe 174 million?

Nobody should be exempt from responsibility for their environmental impact, of course not. My point was that wind turbines simply do not require the pollution standards that oil or coal plants do, because such pollution simply isn't present. A statement of the obvious perhaps, but in response to that point in the post.

Again the point is all about perspective. What kind of hazards are already posed by existing technology and man-made structure on said raptors and bats? I don't know the answer to that but absent that context there is no perspective in which to plunk the wind turbine effect. IOW we don't know what its value is. We don't know the answer to "is that a lot?". So I'm not entirely satisfied with "Windmills are killing a lot of birds", especially given the inevitable political demagoguery that doggedly overemphasizes here and underemphasizes there depending on which approach serves its interest.

And it just seems a wee bit disingenuous to only suddenly discover denial of habitat with wind technology after we've been doing it so long with other stuff.

Yepp. Kicking and screaming, we are going to drag the knuckledraggers of the world with us into the future and then in 70 years, they are gonna lie right out their fat asses and say it was all their idea to begin with. Mark my words.

Conservation, preservation of natural resources and use of renewable energy is supposed to be a CONSERVATIVE battle-cry. But once again, those lonely elephants have dropped the ball...

 

[Spoonman]

I have solar and power my house 100% with it. everything is electric, including heat and stove. I haven't seen a utility bill in 4 years other than a credit for surplus i've produced

 

[flacaltenn]

I have solar and power my house 100% with it. everything is electric, including heat and stove. I haven't seen a utility bill in 4 years other than a credit for surplus i've produced

You generate electricity from wood when the house is 10ft under snow?? ?

 

[Spoonman]

I have solar and power my house 100% with it. everything is electric, including heat and stove. I haven't seen a utility bill in 4 years other than a credit for surplus i've produced

You generate electricity from wood when the house is 10ft under snow?? ?

no, i generate it from the sun. just brush the snow off the panels.

 

[elektra]

The People here are so ignorant, some think the German/European system of using 230 vac is best (which shows ignorance of electricity) So how can anything this user states be taken seriously.

People are speaking how easy it is to power their homes, which I find ridiculous in light of the heavy subsidies which these people never admit too, nor do they really the cost. I have a landlord installed solar hot water heater system on my home, it sucks in the winter, barely warms the water, in the summer its great but I see zero saving on the electric bill. Zero. So who really understands or admits the truth?

 

[elektra]

You know, usually I would let this get by, but your passing reference to the Nazi times is just so fucking batshit crazy, I am gonna have to respond to this one.

Fact:

1.) Use of renewable energy has nothing to do with 1933-1945. Any attempt make a connection between the two is totally foolish. Renewable energy did not exist between 1933-1945.

2.) To say that moving to renewable energy is going to kill people is just plain old stupid. Where is your PROOF that this is going to happen? Do you have statistics about people who have been killed by solar panels and wind/water turbines? Really?

So, let me give you some inside information:

I live 10 kilometers from a wind farm that works perfectly. There are, I believe, 21 turbines in action there. It was created in agreement with farmers, who allow part of the land to be used for wind turbines, who also allow solar panels to be put on their buildings, and they still farm and their animals still graze. Even with the many grey skies that Germany has - the wind energy output here is immense.

I live 20 Kilometers from one of the larger solar farms in the world. The installation is right along the A3 Highway between Siegburg and Frankfurt and covers a huge amount of energy needs.

While American energy bills are going UP, German energy bills are going DOWN.

The cost for converting to Wind/Solar/Water is now at parity with the costs for maintaining a fossil fuel lifestyle in Germany, about 3 years AHEAD of the original calculations.

I just compared my per Kilowatt price with the price that my sister in Ohio pays and was shocked to see that I pay less per month that she does. Actually, considerable less.

The biggest controversy, the one that actually spurred the German government to do what it is doing, was the decision to completely shut down nuclear energy by 2023:

Liste der Kernreaktoren in Deutschland ? Wikipedia

Germany once had 110 reactors, it now has 14 still functioning. 5 of those were supposed to go offline in 2011, but a court case is being fought over them. The last nine are supposed to go offline by December, 2022 at the latest. There are also 8 research reactors still functioning, but not for creating energy to go into the energy-net.

Of course, in order to reduce energy from nuclear, Germany had to IMPORT energy from somewhere else until the solar/wind/water project is completed, and Germany made the mistake of importing lots of energy from nuclear reactors from the Baltic States (Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia), reactors in terrible shape. By importing more and more energy from those reactors, not only was it totally hypocritical of Germany to do this, it was dangerous, for those reactors started pumping overtime in order to meet the extra energy needs of other countries like Germany. If there are any reactors in Europe that need to be shut down right now, as in, like yesterday, then it would be the reactors from those three small nations. When the German population found out about this in 2009, there was a large outcry. And now Germany is no longer importing from the Baltic States.

Call it what you want out of utter ignorance if that pleases you, but Germany is undoubtedly leading the way in the field of renewables: solar, wind, water. They are doing it less with water, because Germany is mostly landlocked and only a small part of the country has a coastline with the North Sea / Atlantic Ocean.

Not only that, when Germany does reach 80% of it's energy from renewables, it won't have to import at all. In fact, in the forseeable future, Germany will be EXPORTING a lot of energy from renewable energy sources. And we are not even talking about fusion - a subject for another day.

Germany has done this because it had to. Necessity is often the mother of invention, and it is definitely the case here. Germany has very few fossil fuel resources left - oil and coal. Most of those resources were used up in WWII. This is fact that most Americans do not know. In fact, the dearth of coal is what led to the Coal/Steel Pact between Germany and France in the early 1950s, just years after the most bitter war in our planet's history ended, even as feelings between those two nations were very, very hard. And that pact is what led to the Franco/Geman Friendship pact of 1963, just 18 years after the end of WWII.

The same lack of natural (fossil fuel) resources is what spurred Germany to move to renewables ahead of the rest of the world. As my ex-father-in-law has often said to me: "Germany's greatest export good is here" - and he would point to his brain, meaning that German know-how, German innovation, which is exported all over the world, fuels a lot of it's economy, which, as you will note, is doing better than the US economy.

Yes, it is true that at the onset, Solar and wind costs more money to put in place and also requires SOME fossil fuels to even build the components. But in the long run, those things last 1000 times longer, or more. Which means that they pay for themselves with time. That SHOULD be a Conservative battle cry, but once again, Conservatives around the world have totally dropped the ball over an issue that could easily be theirs.

So, I have presented cold, hard facts. Where are yours?

To even suggest that the use of renewables is going to kill people in the future is just plain batshit crazy. And then, for you to suggest that this is because the this is a problem because "but theres a history of ending up with crazy and dangerous leadership" is just so batshit crazy, I don't know even where to begin with you. Do Godwin much? How idiotic.

Next time, before you shoot your mouth off about a country I bet you have never even visited, why not ask someone who actually lives there?


[MENTION=30473]flacaltenn[/MENTION]
[MENTION=41527]Pogo[/MENTION]
[MENTION=42916]Derideo_Te[/MENTION] (it's not deceleration, but it's close!!)

Seems like you like want to ignore the piss-poor investments that Germany has made in wind-solar and ignore the performance charts that I posted and the economic analysis I posted just to pick nits about Nazis which I never mentioned. The entire OP is a fraud and a lie pretending to announce some important milestone of performance. When in fact, LOOKING AT THE DATA --- it's the ultimate in public deception..

1) I only referred to the consistently bad choices of leadership that Germans have and continue to make. This alliance with the Green Party is the one that is in play today. And I stand by the comparison. Money has been squandered and infrastructure decisions have been made on ideological platforms -- not engineering and facts.

2) The idea that wind/solar would EVER be a backbone source of generation and a REPLACEMENT for fossils and nuclear is fundamentally wrong and dangerous and WILL lead to getting people killed.. Wind and Solar are PEAKER technologies, not steady backbone generation and as such can NEVER be used to EXPAND capacity to demand. For every MWatt of these sources, there MUST BE parallel resources available. And that means that one or other sits idle and subsidized.



3) I'm not surprised that you sit amongst so many ill-conceived renewable projects. Show us the DAILY production charts for "your" windfarm.. If you can find them they will look no different than this --- which is one of the worlds best sited OFF-SHORE danish farms. And one of the FEW BIG wind projects that still post their embarrassing daily production.

You OVER-build THAT and tear down the nuclear plants and people WILL DIE in the wintertime just as the Forbes article suggests.

The jig is up and lying about the performance of this investment is all that is left..

Gee, I just hate to call anyone out for lying, but you cannot have it both ways.

You wrote:

German technologists are not stupid, but theres a history of ending up with crazy and dangerous leadership...

Since the only, and I mean, only truly dangerous history of leadership in Germany was indeed from 1933-1945, I will not let you get away with this kind of dishonesty.

Secondly, you provide stats from one location for one day and somehow that is supposed to impress me?

The daily stats are not as important as the yearly production stats. For wind, on a windy day, the output will be enormous. On a day where there is no wind, the output will be less. The average is what counts, especially since the energy is being fed all into the same net all the time. This is exactly the same principle that investors in the stock market use for diversifying their respective portfolios.

So, as to coal: Germany is starting to experiment with extracting a lesser quality of coal. The method is being hotly discussed here, most do not want it. But the number of mines (most of which are of course in the Ruhr Valley) are a drop in the bucket compared to the national energy grid.

I will come back and bring you all the facts, not just the few assorted things you have decided to cherry pick.

Once again, shame on you for referring to the Nazi-era. Don't even try to lie again and say it wasn't so. It is quite obvious for anyone with eyes that can see.


One more thing: Germans do NOT want nuclear. They have already made their decision and are quite firm about it. Funny how you, as a supposedly freedom-loving person, want to spit on the wishes of other people. And cut the crap about this is going to cause people to die in the winter. What unbelievable horseshit.

This is, of course, not going to happen, and after a number of years, I plan to confront you about this. Right here, on this thread.

boy, I could not resist to jump in, you state the only dangerous period of German leadership was the NAZI era? 1933-1945?

Seems maybe the average student of History in USA has a greater knowledge of German's History then the average German. I do not state this to insult you, and it seems you may get insulted easily. So please consider this, based on you defining 1933-1945.

It was not only the Socialist (NAZI) that were the problem, it was the typical German that was a problem all the way back to the 1800's.

Before Hitler was born the average German citizen called for the killing of JEWS! Sure some defended the Jews, but only by stating, "if only the Jew would change we could accept the Jew into German Society".

Hitler was born into a country that called for the extermination of the Jews, it was the culture, the society in which Hitler was born, not the society that Hitler created.

I wonder if you know this fact?

As far as your ideas about "perfect" Wind Power, how about telling us how many barrels of oil are used at this Clean Perfect Renewable Wind farm. Did you state the name?

What about maintenance, how much maintenance does this "Perfect" wind farm require.

You state a whole lot that kind of makes me wonder how to even start a debate.

I guess I want to see if you really understand simple History because it seems you may not really understand who killed the Jews.

 

[elektra]

I have solar and power my house 100% with it. everything is electric, including heat and stove. I haven't seen a utility bill in 4 years other than a credit for surplus i've produced

Wow, seems great. A few questions if you do not mind.

Can I have the name of the system, model number? Who built it. Can you take some pics and post them?

Can I know roughly, where your house is, in a city, in the country, on a farm?

How many square feet is your house.

Do you use air conditioning all summer, all day and all night?

How much did it cost, did you get tax credits? How was it paid for? Lease, Bought, Rented? Financed.

How much surplus do you generate, in KWH's?

 

[Statistikhengst]

I have solar and power my house 100% with it. everything is electric, including heat and stove. I haven't seen a utility bill in 4 years other than a credit for surplus i've produced

Wow, seems great. A few questions if you do not mind.

Can I have the name of the system, model number? Who built it. Can you take some pics and post them?

Can I know roughly, where your house is, in a city, in the country, on a farm?

How many square feet is your house.

Do you use air conditioning all summer, all day and all night?

How much did it cost, did you get tax credits? How was it paid for? Lease, Bought, Rented? Financed.

How much surplus do you generate, in KWH's?

Wtf???

 

[Pogo]

I have solar and power my house 100% with it. everything is electric, including heat and stove. I haven't seen a utility bill in 4 years other than a credit for surplus i've produced

Wow, seems great. A few questions if you do not mind.

Can I have the name of the system, model number? Who built it. Can you take some pics and post them?

Can I know roughly, where your house is, in a city, in the country, on a farm?

How many square feet is your house.

Do you use air conditioning all summer, all day and all night?

How much did it cost, did you get tax credits? How was it paid for? Lease, Bought, Rented? Financed.

How much surplus do you generate, in KWH's?

Wtf???

"When will you be on vacation? If I were... I mean, if someone were to steal your system in the middle of the night, what size truck would they need? Is there a U-Haul facility nearby?"....

 

[Statistikhengst]

Seems like you like want to ignore the piss-poor investments that Germany has made in wind-solar and ignore the performance charts that I posted and the economic analysis I posted just to pick nits about Nazis which I never mentioned. The entire OP is a fraud and a lie pretending to announce some important milestone of performance. When in fact, LOOKING AT THE DATA --- it's the ultimate in public deception..

1) I only referred to the consistently bad choices of leadership that Germans have and continue to make. This alliance with the Green Party is the one that is in play today. And I stand by the comparison. Money has been squandered and infrastructure decisions have been made on ideological platforms -- not engineering and facts.

2) The idea that wind/solar would EVER be a backbone source of generation and a REPLACEMENT for fossils and nuclear is fundamentally wrong and dangerous and WILL lead to getting people killed.. Wind and Solar are PEAKER technologies, not steady backbone generation and as such can NEVER be used to EXPAND capacity to demand. For every MWatt of these sources, there MUST BE parallel resources available. And that means that one or other sits idle and subsidized.



3) I'm not surprised that you sit amongst so many ill-conceived renewable projects. Show us the DAILY production charts for "your" windfarm.. If you can find them they will look no different than this --- which is one of the worlds best sited OFF-SHORE danish farms. And one of the FEW BIG wind projects that still post their embarrassing daily production.

You OVER-build THAT and tear down the nuclear plants and people WILL DIE in the wintertime just as the Forbes article suggests.

The jig is up and lying about the performance of this investment is all that is left..

Gee, I just hate to call anyone out for lying, but you cannot have it both ways.

You wrote:

German technologists are not stupid, but theres a history of ending up with crazy and dangerous leadership...

Since the only, and I mean, only truly dangerous history of leadership in Germany was indeed from 1933-1945, I will not let you get away with this kind of dishonesty.

Secondly, you provide stats from one location for one day and somehow that is supposed to impress me?

The daily stats are not as important as the yearly production stats. For wind, on a windy day, the output will be enormous. On a day where there is no wind, the output will be less. The average is what counts, especially since the energy is being fed all into the same net all the time. This is exactly the same principle that investors in the stock market use for diversifying their respective portfolios.

So, as to coal: Germany is starting to experiment with extracting a lesser quality of coal. The method is being hotly discussed here, most do not want it. But the number of mines (most of which are of course in the Ruhr Valley) are a drop in the bucket compared to the national energy grid.

I will come back and bring you all the facts, not just the few assorted things you have decided to cherry pick.

Once again, shame on you for referring to the Nazi-era. Don't even try to lie again and say it wasn't so. It is quite obvious for anyone with eyes that can see.


One more thing: Germans do NOT want nuclear. They have already made their decision and are quite firm about it. Funny how you, as a supposedly freedom-loving person, want to spit on the wishes of other people. And cut the crap about this is going to cause people to die in the winter. What unbelievable horseshit.

This is, of course, not going to happen, and after a number of years, I plan to confront you about this. Right here, on this thread.

boy, I could not resist to jump in, you state the only dangerous period of German leadership was the NAZI era? 1933-1945?

Seems maybe the average student of History in USA has a greater knowledge of German's History then the average German. I do not state this to insult you, and it seems you may get insulted easily. So please consider this, based on you defining 1933-1945.

It was not only the Socialist (NAZI) that were the problem, it was the typical German that was a problem all the way back to the 1800's.

Before Hitler was born the average German citizen called for the killing of JEWS! Sure some defended the Jews, but only by stating, "if only the Jew would change we could accept the Jew into German Society".

Hitler was born into a country that called for the extermination of the Jews, it was the culture, the society in which Hitler was born, not the society that Hitler created.

I wonder if you know this fact?

As far as your ideas about "perfect" Wind Power, how about telling us how many barrels of oil are used at this Clean Perfect Renewable Wind farm. Did you state the name?

What about maintenance, how much maintenance does this "Perfect" wind farm require.

You state a whole lot that kind of makes me wonder how to even start a debate.

I guess I want to see if you really understand simple History because it seems you may not really understand who killed the Jews.

Well now, that was some interesting but ill-informed bullshit you served up there, [MENTION=46310]elektra[/MENTION].

I am an American living and working in Germany for 17 years and I quite sure I know the history of this land far more than you will ever know.

Not only am I am American living in Germany, I am an American Jew living in Germany, so you can be quite guaranteed that I am well versed in more than one facet of German history.

Germany had a number of rough periods - well, different parts of Germany had rough periods, but the unification happened in the 1880s and no period in any part of Germany's history was dangerous in any comparable way to 1933-1945.

So, no, you didn't insult me, but you indeed showed your ignorant ass for what it is. Just like the first time I encountered you here in USMB and you were unbelievably rough and assholian and uncouth. I am not easily insulted, but don't have much patience with self-aggrandizing fools. So, your name fits you quite well.

Hitler was not born in Germany, btw. He was born in Austria. And in Austria, there were not cries for the extemination of Jews when and where he was born.

So, yes, I know exactly who killed "the Jews".

I never mentioned "perfect" wind power. So, who were you quoting? It wasn't me. Or were you simply lying? Somehow, that would not surprise me. Do you enjoy lying?

Your ignorant and ill-though response shows - once again - how little you understand history.

So, to recap the title of this thread:

Germany Generated 74 Percent Of Power Needs From Renewable Energy


It is a fact that Germany is now achieving 3/4 of it's energy output through renewables.

You don't like it? Tough fuck for you.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Wow, seems great. A few questions if you do not mind.

Can I have the name of the system, model number? Who built it. Can you take some pics and post them?

Can I know roughly, where your house is, in a city, in the country, on a farm?

How many square feet is your house.

Do you use air conditioning all summer, all day and all night?

How much did it cost, did you get tax credits? How was it paid for? Lease, Bought, Rented? Financed.

How much surplus do you generate, in KWH's?

Wtf???

"When will you be on vacation? If I were... I mean, if someone were to steal your system in the middle of the night, what size truck would they need? Is there a U-Haul facility nearby?"....

Yes and "can you happen to provide me with your credit card institute, maybe the card number, and hey, how about a pin and some tans...."

She is

 

[Spoonman]

The People here are so ignorant, some think the German/European system of using 230 vac is best (which shows ignorance of electricity) So how can anything this user states be taken seriously.

People are speaking how easy it is to power their homes, which I find ridiculous in light of the heavy subsidies which these people never admit too, nor do they really the cost. I have a landlord installed solar hot water heater system on my home, it sucks in the winter, barely warms the water, in the summer its great but I see zero saving on the electric bill. Zero. So who really understands or admits the truth?

sounds like its a passive system, not photovoltaic. there is a big difference