Future Program for Deficit Spending

[Critter7r]

You can ignore reality all day too.

Their own Finance minister called their " Green revolution " iniative a disaster.

Here's what the German people got for their huge investment in renewable energy.

300 percent higher cost on energy than the average American and dirtier air because now they are having to build new Coal fired power plants to make up for the lags in power that are inherent to Wind and Solar.

Their cost being 300% higher than the US means nothing. Was it cheaper than the US previously? No.

Are they dumb for using brown coal, probably, but using brown coal is one of the reasons they're using more coal, because it's lower potential energy density. And using it allows them to use more resources from within their own country.

Whether by design, or by ignorance, you're leaving out a piece of that energy puzzle. Let's break it down ... Germany was previously providing all of their electrical needs via coal fired power plants, and now that they're getting 30% of their electricity from renewables, they have to build more coal fired power plants?

Yeah, something's missing. I'll be honest and say that I don't know what it is that's creating the need for more coal fired power plants ... a larger population, more industrial usage, shuttering of old plants (i.e. replacement of plants, as opposed to "building more") ... but it's missing from your equation.

EDIT: And it's not because of their increase use of renewables.

 

[MTAtech]

Well, if we pretend that it's not a inferior technology I guess we could use that as a excuse. Problem is it's not. If it were left up to me we would be investing in Nuclear power and building new power plants and ignore this ridiculous initiative to power our grid with Solar and Wind.

Solar has been around for a LONG time and it still has to be heavily subsidized by both the consumer and the Government. The first patent for a photovoltaic cell was given out in the late 1800's, and with the exception of inverter and battery technology it really hasn't changed that much.

At one time, the automobile was considered inferior to horse-drawn carriages. Things advance and change.

As of now, nuclear is very expensive. It's expensive because it is plagued by rampant cost overruns that private utilities are reluctant to assume risk. As for accident risk, no nuclear plant will be built unless the federal government indemnifies and absorbs the risk that the utility would otherwise assume. As someone who worships the free market, I am sure that notion is abhorrent to you.

Solar is getting cheaper and cheaper and the number of solar installations is growing rapidly. In 2012, there were more solar installations than the previous decade. The real question is whether one is going to be an advocate of horse-drawn carriages or go with the new technology?

EDIT: I have no idea why conservatives have such a knee-jerk detest for clean energy.

 

[Fenton]

Their cost being 300% higher than the US means nothing. Was it cheaper than the US previously? No.

Are they dumb for using brown coal, probably, but using brown coal is one of the reasons they're using more coal, because it's lower potential energy density. And using it allows them to use more resources from within their own country.

Whether by design, or by ignorance, you're leaving out a piece of that energy puzzle. Let's break it down ... Germany was previously providing all of their electrical needs via coal fired power plants, and now that they're getting 30% of their electricity from renewables, they have to build more coal fired power plants?

Yeah, something's missing. I'll be honest and say that I don't know what it is that's creating the need for more coal fired power plants ... a larger population, more industrial usage, shuttering of old plants (i.e. replacement of plants, as opposed to "building more") ... but it's missing from your equation.

EDIT: And it's not because of their increase use of renewables.

Facts....deal with these.

The Daily Bell - Germany's Green Energy Revolution May Be on Verge of Failure

" Angela Merkel's Vice Chancellor Stuns, Declares Germany's 'Energiewende' To Be On 'The Verge Of Failure' ... The green energy orgy in Germany is over. The music has stopped and the wine that once flowed freely has long run out. The green energy whores and pimps can go home. In a stunning admission by Germany's Economics Minister and Vice Chancellor to Angela Merkel, Sigmar Gabriel announced in a recent speech that the country's once highly ballyhooed transformation to renewable energy, the so called Energiewende, a model that has been adopted by a number of countries worldwide, is "on the verge of failure."

Germany’s Green Elephant | Foreign Policy

" The energy transformation, known as "Energiewende," was meant to give Germany an energy sector that would be cleaner and more competitive, fueling an export-driven economy and helping to slash greenhouse-gas emissions. On that count, the policy has floundered: German emissions are rising, not falling, because the country is burning increasing amounts of dirty coal. And electricity costs, already high, have kept rising, making life difficult for small and medium-sized businesses that compete against rivals with cheaper energy."

Germany's Green Energy Disaster: A Cautionary Tale For World Leaders - Forbes

" Merkel’s energy plan called for the addition of 25,000 megawatts of sea-based wind turbine power by 2030. However through the first six months of 2012 only 45 megawatts had been added to Germany’s existing 200-megawatt supply, according to an industry analyst quoted by Reuters. And despite massive subsidies funded by a household energy surcharge (which currently comprises 14 percent of German power bills), major wind projects in the North Sea are being delayed or canceled due to skittish investors."

“Generating energy with wind involves extreme fluctuations because it depends on the weather and includes periods without any recognizable capacity for days, or suddenly occurring supply peaks that push the grid to its limits,” a 2012 report from Germany energy expert Dr. Guenter Keil notes. “There is a threat of power outages over large areas, mainly in wintertime when the demand is high and less (power) gets delivered from abroad.”

Because renewable power sources have been so unreliable, Germany has been forced to construct numerous new coal plants in an effort to replace the nuclear energy it has taken offline. In fact the country will build more coal-fired facilities this year than at any time in the past two decades – bringing an estimated 5,300 megawatts of new capacity online. Most of these facilities will burn lignite, too, which is strip-mined and emits nearly 30 percent more carbon dioxide than hard coal."


You have NO IDEA what your'e talking about.

 

[Fenton]

At one time, the automobile was considered inferior to horse-drawn carriages. Things advance and change.

As of now, nuclear is very expensive. It's expensive because it is plagued by rampant cost overruns that private utilities are reluctant to assume risk. As for accident risk, no nuclear plant will be built unless the federal government indemnifies and absorbs the risk that the utility would otherwise assume. As someone who worships the free market, I am sure that notion is abhorrent to you.

Solar is getting cheaper and cheaper and the number of solar installations is growing rapidly. In 2012, there were more solar installations than the previous decade. The real question is whether one is going to be an advocate of horse-drawn carriages or go with the new technology?

LOL !!!

Solar technology is not " new ".

HISTORY AND FUTURE OF PHOTOVOLTAICS

 

[Critter7r]

Facts....deal with these.


Because renewable power sources have been so unreliable, Germany has been forced to construct numerous new coal plants in an effort to replace the nuclear energy it has taken offline.


You have NO IDEA what your'e talking about.

That's entirely possible, I haven't been there in person. But it's also obvious that the article about "green energy whores and pimps" isn't exactly unbiased.

And Germany made a bad policy decision that in no way reflects on the viability of renewables. They shuttered nuclear plants before enough renewables were online to replace them. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I might say it was done on purpose to dampen the demand for renewables by making them look "unreliable".

 

[Fenton]

That's entirely possible, I haven't been there in person. But it's also obvious that the article about "green energy whores and pimps" isn't exactly unbiased.

And Germany made a bad policy decision that in no way reflects on the viability of renewables. They shuttered nuclear plants before enough renewables were online to replace them. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I might say it was done on purpose to dampen the demand for renewables by making them look "unreliable".

Yea they made a bad policy decision, and if it can happen in Germany, it can happen anywhere

They based their decision not on a careful and thoughtful analysis of the pro's and cons of renewable energy sources, they based their decision on a bunch of far left narratives not grounded in reality.

Ideologues are dangerous people and their actions and the consequences of their actions needs to be exposed repeatedly so we don't see something like this happen here.

 

[Critter7r]

LOL !!!

Solar technology is not " new ".

HISTORY AND FUTURE OF PHOTOVOLTAICS

Neither is dental technology, but I don't want to go back to the 1880's for a root canal either.

Things change.

The technology will improve, become less expensive and soon enough it will meaningfully supplement and eventually replace current power generation technology.

 

[Critter7r]

Yea they made a bad policy decision, and if it can happen in Germany, it can happen anywhere

They based their decision not on a careful and thoughtful analysis of the pro's and cons of renewable energy sources, they based their decision on a bunch of far left narratives not grounded in reality.

Ideologues are dangerous people and their actions and the consequences of their actions needs to be exposed repeatedly so we don't see something like this happen here.

As is anyone with an extreme position and a loud voice.

EDIT: I'm advocating a gradual increase in solar power generation based on household systems, not power plant decommissioning on the promise of wind farms that haven't been built yet.

 

[MTAtech]

That's entirely possible, I haven't been there in person. But it's also obvious that the article about "green energy whores and pimps" isn't exactly unbiased.

And Germany made a bad policy decision that in no way reflects on the viability of renewables. They shuttered nuclear plants before enough renewables were online to replace them. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I might say it was done on purpose to dampen the demand for renewables by making them look "unreliable".

The shuttered them because they realized they were vulnerable to the same accident that destroyed the Japanese nuke plant.

 

[Fenton]

As is anyone with an extreme position and a loud voice.

EDIT: I'm advocating a gradual increase in solar power generation based on household systems, not power plant decommissioning on the promise of wind farms that haven't been built yet.

I have no issue with anyone who wants to go to the expense and trouble of setting up a whole home Solar set up. More power to you if that's what you want to do. But don't push that technology on me or anyone else through regulations, mandates or even subsidies

Solar has been around for a long time. The first pattent for a photovolatiac cell was given out in the late 1800's. What's changed is battery tech and inverter tech but it's still essentially the same set up that it was back in the 80s.

When it reaches a point where it's a viable and equitable alternative to fossil fuels you won't need to subsidize it. Until then the responsible thing to do is to continue to improve energy efficiency in everything from automobiles to dishwashers and we SHOULD be building Nuke plants.

 

[Fenton]

The shuttered them because they realized they were vulnerable to the same accident that destroyed the Japanese nuke plant.

They were vulnerable to Tsunaimi's ?? Lol...

 

[Critter7r]

I have no issue with anyone who wants to go to the expense and trouble of setting up a whole home Solar set up. More power to you if that's what you want to do. But don't push that technology on me or anyone else through regulations, mandates or even subsidies

Thanks, I'll start looking for my new solar panels.

Solar has been around for a long time. The first pattent for a photovolatiac cell was given out in the late 1800's. What's changed is battery tech and inverter tech but it's still essentially the same set up that it was back in the 80s.

And dental technology is essentially the same as it was in the 1800s also. What's changed is anesthesia, but other than that, it's essentially the same. (notice my friendly sarcasm )

When it reaches a point where it's a viable and equitable alternative to fossil fuels you won't need to subsidize it. Until then the responsible thing to do is to continue to improve energy efficiency in everything from automobiles to dishwashers and we SHOULD be building Nuke plants.

Improvements to the efficiency of automobiles is achieved mostly thru regulations ... :eeek!!

But I do agree that when it's an economically viable alternative, it won't need to be subsidized.

 

[Fenton]

Thanks, I'll start looking for my new solar panels.



And dental technology is essentially the same as it was in the 1800s also. What's changed is anesthesia, but other than that, it's essentially the same. (notice my friendly sarcasm )



Improvements to the efficiency of automobiles is achieved mostly thru regulations ... :eeek!!

But I do agree that when it's an economically viable alternative, it won't need to be subsidized.

Mandated fuel effeciencies created some desperately horrible automobiles.

I remember what those mandated fuel efficiencies did to the American muscle cars in the 70s.

That Firebird that was in Smokie and the Bandit was neutered down to under 200 hp. When they strapped emissions to carburetors they turned allot of decent automobiles into junk.

New CAFE standards mean auto manufacturers have to cut weight and risk the safety if their occupants.

For a laugh go to YouTube and look up " Smart Car crash test ".

It basically turns into a Soccer ball after a accident and bounces around hitting anything and everything in a 10 meter vicinity.

 

[Critter7r]

Mandated fuel effeciencies created some desperately horrible automobiles.

I remember what those mandated fuel efficiencies did to the American muscle cars in the 70s.

That Firebird that was in Smokie and the Bandit was neutered down to under 200 hp. When they strapped emissions to carburetors they turned allot of decent automobiles into junk.

New CAFE standards mean auto manufacturers have to cut weight and risk the safety if their occupants.

For a laugh go to YouTube and look up " Smart Car crash test ".

It basically turns into a Soccer ball after a accident and bounces around hitting anything and everything in a 10 meter vicinity.

But you just said that the responsible thing to do was to "continue to improve energy efficiency in automobiles". Automakers wouldn't have to spend nearly the money on those increases that they do now if it weren't for those regulations. Those regulations achieve the thing that you want to achieve and that thing wouldn't be achieved without those regulations. Sure the public would want to spend less money on gas and produce less pollution, but they wouldn't stop buying cars because they don't meet the 35mpg rule that's coming soon.

I've seen the Smart Car crash. It was a soccer ball before the impact.

 

[jaeger19]

Well, if we pretend that it's not a inferior technology I guess we could use that as a excuse. Problem is it's not. If it were left up to me we would be investing in Nuclear power and building new power plants and ignore this ridiculous initiative to power our grid with Solar and Wind.

Solar has been around for a LONG time and it still has to be heavily subsidized by both the consumer and the Government. The first patent for a photovoltaic cell was given out in the late 1800's, and with the exception of inverter and battery technology it really hasn't changed that much.

right now they are flying a plane around the world with using only solar power...

Seems just a bit more advanced than the late 1800's

 

[jaeger19]

I have no issue with anyone who wants to go to the expense and trouble of setting up a whole home Solar set up. More power to you if that's what you want to do. But don't push that technology on me or anyone else through regulations, mandates or even subsidies

Solar has been around for a long time. The first pattent for a photovolatiac cell was given out in the late 1800's. What's changed is battery tech and inverter tech but it's still essentially the same set up that it was back in the 80s.

When it reaches a point where it's a viable and equitable alternative to fossil fuels you won't need to subsidize it. Until then the responsible thing to do is to continue to improve energy efficiency in everything from automobiles to dishwashers and we SHOULD be building Nuke plants.

I and my neighbors now use solar energy to power our irrigation lines. Within 3 years.. the decrease in energy costs paid for the systems. My neighbors use solar to completely power their home.

More and more agricultural businesses are going to solar. The technology is definitely there.. the problem is largely installation.

 

[Fenton]

I and my neighbors now use solar energy to power our irrigation lines. Within 3 years.. the decrease in energy costs paid for the systems. My neighbors use solar to completely power their home.

More and more agricultural businesses are going to solar. The technology is definitely there.. the problem is largely installation.

So they have a off grid solar generator powering their irrigation pumps ?? What's the wattage or Kilo-wattage out put and is a true off grid set up ( Batteries ) or is it tied into to utility ??

 

[jaeger19]

So they have a off grid solar generator powering their irrigation pumps ?? What's the wattage or Kilo-wattage out put and is a true off grid set up ( Batteries ) or is it tied into to utility ??

Its a 450 kw system and produces about 50% of the power I need per year. the rest is utility.

Since my peak production is during the same time that the utility company has high usage, it evens out, so when I am a net producer, that goes as a credit to offset when I am a net user. (it used to be better.. I used to make money off it).

the utility company because of the number of farmers doing this has reduced its use of fossil fuels by 50%. Which makes it happy since using fossil fuels to generate electricity was the greatest expense to the utility.

My neighbors have similar systems.. except since they live on the properties they have their homes on solar.

Two of my neighbors are strictly solar because they are remote enough that the grid doesn't reach them.