604
Germany set to miss net zero by 2045 target as climate efforts falter (www.reuters.com)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
271 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 3 years ago (7 children)

If only there was some means of replacing all that coal with a non-carbon intensive source of energy that isn't dependant on the weather...

Has anyone heard of such a technology?

Sarcasm aside, that Germany shut down their last two nuclear reactors so recently and carried through is astounding. The excuses are mind-boggling. They're old? Refurbishing is cheaper and faster than new built. They need re-certification? Then do it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 28 points 3 years ago* (6 children)

    It's more efficient to use the money required for

    1. The inspection
    2. The renovations
    3. Acquiring new fuel

    And spend it on renewables than to do the above.

    Also a big factor noone seems to care about: staff. The people who worked there have other jobs now. You can't just plop a reactor plant somewhere and expect it to make electricity you need highly specialised staff for that. We also did not invest into training new staff because why would we, with the stop for nuclear power being decided 10 years ago.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    The renewables generate electricity mostly when there is sun/wind, so there is an oversupply at those times and a need to burn natural gas at other times.

    The nuclear plants would generate electricity 24/7 with little waste.

    Either way, now they are investing the money in digging up lignite, so it's worse than either renewables or nuclear.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    Either way, now they are investing the money in digging up lignite, so it’s worse than either renewables or nuclear.

    Where do you get that from?

    The renewables generate electricity mostly when there is sun/wind, so there is an oversupply at those times and a need to burn natural gas at other times.

    The nuclear plants would generate electricity 24/7 with little waste.

    Yes congrats, we will need to build energy storages. Thats nothing new. Also calling the waste of nuclear plant little might be factually true if you only go by volume. If you go by "amount of pain in the ass to deal with" calling it little would be a very big understatement.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    Where do you get that from?

    Duitsland zet vol in op kolen, maar vooral transport blijkt knelpunt - https://nos.nl/l/2438762

    Germany to reactivate coal power plants as Russia curbs gas flow - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jul/08/germany-reactivate-coal-power-plants-russia-curbs-gas-flow

    The eviction of Lützerath: the village being destroyed for a coalmine – a photo essay - https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2023/jan/24/eviction-lutzerath-village-destroyed-coalmine-a-photo-essay

    Yes congrats, we will need to build energy storages. Thats nothing new.

    Ok, so where are the energy storages currently being built? This is not exactly a problem that's cheap or trivial to solve.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago

    Can't comment on the first one.

    The guardian article says that Germany reactivated coal plants to act as an emergency if the gas would not be enough. It's important to known that gas is not primarly used to make electricity, gas plants are only used when there are peaks in consumption that can not be fulfilled by any other means. Reactivating plants as an emergency backup is not the same as investing in coal power. I am not clear on whether they were even necessary, afaik the gas reserves never went into a critically low level.

    Lüzerath is a whole other story. That deal had been made long ago, RWE agreed to stop mining coal earlier if they were allowed to mine the area with that village on top of it. It became a symbol, and people claimed the coal was necessary to maintain stability in the electricity network. Which was proven wrong it was mostly sold to other countries to be burned in their plants.

    For all our faults Germany is steadily leaving both fossile and nuclear power behind.

    Ok, so where are the energy storages currently being built? This is not exactly a problem that's cheap or trivial to solve.

    You mean just like nuclear plants are very expensive and non-trivial to build?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent