The environment requires this be our global goal.
Originally shared by David Fuchs
"That’s a big deal. On May 8th, at 11 a.m. local time, the total output of German solar, wind, hydropower, and biomass reached 55 gigawatts (GW), just short of the 58 GW consumed by every light bulb, washing machine, water heater and personal computer humming away on Sunday morning. See the graph below, courtesy Agora Energiewende, a German clean energy think tank. (It’s important to note that most likely, not all of that 55 GW could be used at the time it was generated due to system and grid limitations, but it’s still noteworthy that this quantity of power was produced.)"
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/05/09/3776629/germany-renewable-generation/?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=webfeeds
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
LEGO Americana Roadshow: Building Across America I just checked out this traveling exhibition from LEGO and was quite impressed. The scale ... -
When we let politics trump science, people are needlessly put in harm's way. http://arstechnica.com/science/2017/01/self-censoring-fears...
-
Thank you, Lego, for letting me simply tell you online which parts were missing from the boy's Christmas present and sending them to me,...
so cool
ReplyDeleteNot so awesome when you know the background.
ReplyDeleteGermany has decided to go "renewable" but it has not the proper grid to do it nor the suppleness.
Instead, it relies on its neighbours, France mainly but also Switzerland and Belgium, to absorb its power surplus by shutting generation from their own power plants (hydro or nuclear for example).
In case of low production, Germany can also buys from France. So far, in 2016, it didn't have to do it. Because Germany still relies on an heavy and archaic coal power plant network, using dirty coals (lignite and bituminous coal) for 40% of its average production .
All in all, it remains, by far, the largest global warming gas contributor of Europe. Per inhabitant, the average in EU is around 8.5 tons/year. Germany is around 11 tons, France around 6 tons (and USA, 19 tons, but that's another issue altogether).
That's the bottom line.
Conceptually the idea is great. But the heart of a renewables infinite growth is flawed hence the associated issues highlighted by the above poster. But as we move towards a global socialist society, these developments are..the ground work, the preparatory work for that eventuality.
ReplyDeleteOlivier Malinur They might not burning quite so much carbon if they hadn't axed their nuclear plants because OMG Fukushima.
ReplyDeleteOlivier Malinur your skepticism is underwhelming. You don't contribute to global warming by putting up a wind farm you reduce your carbon input. You're trying to skew the facts to suit your argument.
ReplyDeleteThe way they did this was by subsidizing green energy. The amount that is paid to private producers is more than the cost of the energy for the consumers allowing for investment in solar and wind power generation..
ReplyDeleteMorio Murase, 100% agree with you. Under the pressure of Greens which are as unscientific as the GOP in the USA (but with opposite beliefs), they decided for irrational choices using neighbors to support them. Human don't, unfortunately, understand the concept of risk p(hazard, impact). They focus on the visible impact. The probability is a f(frequency) as well as loss.
ReplyDeleteResult: nuclear energy is perceived as more "risky" than solar. All in all, there has been more deaths from roof top panels installation/mw than with nuclear power plants.
William Stolley, I am not skeptic. I am actually strongly involved in 2x 20 MW solar power plant. I am just saying Germany has made wrong choice by abandoning nuclear. I also say that 40% of german electricity is coal, that their carbon footprint is horrible (at european level), that their grid is not supple enough and neighbouring countries have to accommodate their peak production.
I never said that renewable contribute to global warming as much as fossil fuels, this will be bs. I am just saying Germany is not a good example. But they are good in PR.
Finally, let me also be clear: renewable doesn't mean without impact. Hydroelectric energy is pretty clearly a renewable which can have disastrous impact. The clearest example is the Zipingpu dam in China which led to 80,000 deaths with Sichuan earthquake.
Another example is the lithium mining for the batteries of your solar installation, your phone, your laptop or your EV. It consumes a huge amount of water to get 1 g of lithium (if I remember well, that is 1000 times more water per Kj than frack gas). Result: the lakes in southern Bolivia are drying and farmers are suffering.
The only virtuous behavior is reduce our consumption of energy.
For 90% of your generation to be wind/solar you either need a lot of standby generation for the days that are not windy (expensive) or a huge amount of storage. Every house with an electric car is about the right level of storage. At the moment all the extra battery charge/discharge cycles involved in using a car for grid storage is likely to have a substantial effect on battery life expectancy so improved batteries are also needed.
ReplyDeleteElektrik üretim prensibi aynı , yöntem ve modelleri değişiyorken, hala elektriği bağımlı kalacak formlarda üretmek ve bu şekilde arayışı sürdürmeleri , Devletlerin enerji politikalarında ticari değer taşıma şartı ile denetimde tutmasından ibaret. Elektrikten elektrik üretimi mümkünken coğrafi , tabi ve yakıt gibi koşul ve şartlara bağlı kalınmadan çevreci , temiz ve ucuz elde edilebilir.
ReplyDeleteما احلة جمال الطبيعة
ReplyDeleteThis is a fantastic achievement and l wish to see this emulated in Australia some day.
ReplyDeleteThis is awesome. Hope every country adapts the same in coming time.
ReplyDeleteI play a small roll in climate change. Helping researchers and scientists.
http://www.kaleidoclimatics.com