6 minutes ago, fxe1200 said:

There is NO large amount of pellets being burnt, though it is correctly carbon neutral. May I polish up your knowledge? Look at the chart. When the the use of Lignite, hard coal and nuclear power has vanished, Germany will use Russian gas as a backup, 40% of the natural gas used in Germany come from Russia anyhow(21% Norway, 29% Netherland, 7% own production, and 3% from other resources).

Due to non continuous solar and wind, storage is a key issue. I still think 20% to 30% nuclear is sensible. Purely political decision to placate the great unwashed.

Here's some sobering info from New Scientist ( a comic kept in the school library unknown to the footballers)

 

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20928053-600-fossil-fuels-are-far-deadlier-than-nuclear-power/

Since Trump and Brexit it's modern style to work with alternative facts. Alternative facts means: subjects you believe in, but cannot be approved. Believe means: not knowing the facts.

 

So let me improve this:

 

Sydebolle said - #3

Fact is, that the electricity now is drawn from sockets fed by the French Electricity Authorities ....... which produce nuclear power. So much to transparency, EU politics and the bunch of liars and crooks.

 

Hanaguma said - #10

It's lovely to think of, but electricity is only a small part of Germany's overall energy use.  Less than 20% I believe. The majority is still fossil fuels, and the majority of that is still imported.  Germany is still the largest importer of natural gas n the world.

 

 

A trustful resource - Deutsches Umweltamt, a public agency - gives the facts (I try to translate it in English):

In general (inserting a copy of a screenshot doesn't work):
 

It shows the part of renewable energy in the year 2017

first row: electricity  -           36,0 %

second row: heat energy -     13,9 %

third row: traffic -                   5,2 %         

All together: 417 TWh have been produced ( 1 TWh = 1 billion kw) by renewable energy. Thereof

• 52% (216 TWh) for electricity

• 41% (171 TWh) for caloric energy

• 7% (30 TWh) for biogenic fuels in traffic

Russian gas will/can deliver the missing energy parts in the future. For extreme situation coal will work again for winning energy. I.e. if there would be an extreme drought as in 2018.

18 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

There was me thinking it was because Maggie Thatcher wanted to destroy the miners union.

It was part of a process. First were the shipbuilders, second the steelworkers, finally the miners. And all their repective industries.

8 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Here's some sobering info from New Scientist ( a comic kept in the school library unknown to the footballers)

 

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20928053-600-fossil-fuels-are-far-deadlier-than-nuclear-power/

....but nuclear power is far more expensive, as you have to consider the waste, which has to be stored safely for the next 10.000 years

8 minutes ago, fxe1200 said:

....but nuclear power is far more expensive, as you have to consider the waste, which has to be stored safely for the next 10.000 years

Read this and weep

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/oct/21/nuclear-power-in-the-uk-a-history

 

Money isn't everything. I for one am sick of going for the cheapest solution rather than the best solution 

 

Long term storage is not an issue. I worked on a proposal with UMIST for BFNL. Details beyond scope of TVF

 

Low level waste is a complete non issue.

Edited January 28, 20197 yr by Grouse

But but but...Trump says coal is the energy of the future! 

20 minutes ago, puck2 said:

Since Trump and Brexit it's modern style to work with alternative facts. Alternative facts means: subjects you believe in, but cannot be approved. Believe means: not knowing the facts.

 

So let me improve this:

 

Sydebolle said - #3

Fact is, that the electricity now is drawn from sockets fed by the French Electricity Authorities ....... which produce nuclear power. So much to transparency, EU politics and the bunch of liars and crooks.

 

Hanaguma said - #10

It's lovely to think of, but electricity is only a small part of Germany's overall energy use.  Less than 20% I believe. The majority is still fossil fuels, and the majority of that is still imported.  Germany is still the largest importer of natural gas n the world.

 

 

A trustful resource - Deutsches Umweltamt, a public agency - gives the facts (I try to translate it in English):

In general (inserting a copy of a screenshot doesn't work):
 

It shows the part of renewable energy in the year 2017

first row: electricity  -           36,0 %

second row: heat energy -     13,9 %

third row: traffic -                   5,2 %         

All together: 417 TWh have been produced ( 1 TWh = 1 billion kw) by renewable energy. Thereof

• 52% (216 TWh) for electricity

• 41% (171 TWh) for caloric energy

• 7% (30 TWh) for biogenic fuels in traffic

Russian gas will/can deliver the missing energy parts in the future. For extreme situation coal will work again for winning energy. I.e. if there would be an extreme drought as in 2018.

Sorry but that is a nonsense post.

 

The only way to CREATE energy is a nuclear reaction 

 

Everything else is just energy conversion

 

Energy in electrical form is exceedingly useful and becoming more so

 

Electrical energy from conversion of fossil fuels is killing the planet. Stop it.

Just now, Skeptic7 said:

But but but...Trump says coal is the energy of the future! 

Yes, Motown will be saved by the coal fired car ????

41 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Well, well! Interesting times!

 

Great they are stopping burning lignite, filthy stuff!

 

Major mistake stopping nuclear fission. One down side of coalition government is that you have to listen to the greens. Even Green Peace is pro nuclear. And so am I. Obviously. 

 

I noted Ted the discontinuous nature of both solar and wind. But still great progress.

 

The most interesting point for me was the 40 billion euros for areas affected. I wonder what British miners think of that? How much did Thatcher and Minford put into Barnsley and similar coal towns? That's Germans for you! What about the war I say! 

British miners; and steelworkers; were part of the EEC coal and steel community and were entitled to enhanced redundancy payments, even those from Barnsley. Much EU money was invested in coalfield areas, primarily on infrastructure - new roads for example. 

Low paid jobs were created, so many coal and steel towns are still amongst the poorest in the UK.

Who is Minford?

6 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

But but but...Trump says coal is the energy of the future! 

 

That's clean coal, which Trump believes is a real thing.  I suspect he thinks it looks like this:

 

45 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Yes, Motown will be saved by the coal fired car ????

Smokey Robinson

Edited January 28, 20197 yr by ballpoint

39 minutes ago, attrayant said:

 

That's clean coal, which Trump believes is a real thing.  I suspect he thinks it looks like this:

 

Make Coal White Again!

5 hours ago, Henryford said:

Russian gas. That's why Merkel is in Putin's pocket.

Add Turkey https://www.dailysabah.com/energy/2018/10/27/turkey-germany-agree-to-join-forces-for-new-energy-industry-projects