• Have something to say? Register Now! and be posting in minutes!

OT: Bullshitting at the Barbershop part deux

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bloody Brian Burke

#1 CFL Fan!
36,216
11,532
1,033
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Location
West Toronto, BC
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,152.09
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
So, I'm not that clever, but if we're burning coal in order to generate the electricity we need to power our EVs etc., how is that helping us as far as climate change is concerned?
They'll claim it's an "emergency" resulting from Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

In reality every environmentalist and "green"-leaning voter who shit on nuclear for half a century should have to live next door to coal-fired power plants in perpetuity because this shit's on them.
 

thedddd

Well-Known Member
36,655
17,274
1,033
Joined
Sep 2, 2010
Location
Pittsburgh
Hoopla Cash
$ 201.37
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
They'll claim it's an "emergency" resulting from Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

In reality every environmentalist and "green"-leaning voter who shit on nuclear for half a century should have to live next door to coal-fired power plants in perpetuity because this shit's on them.
Per this I am not sure they are 100% related since Nuclear was only supplying 11% of the energy in 2020.

Facts of the German nuclear phase-out​

The last nuclear power plant in Germany will cease operation in December 2022. This definitive end-date is part of the 2011 Nuclear Energy Act (Atomgesetz) which withdrew the authorisation to operate nuclear reactors for power generation according to a phase-out schedule. From having a share of 22.2 percent in total electricity generation in 2010, the contribution of nuclear decreased to 11 percent in 2020. At the same time, renewables such as wind, solar PV and biogas provided around 45 percent of power generation in 2020. After three out of six remaining reactors are shuttered in December 2021 (Grohnde, Gundremmingen C and Brokdorf), only three (with a combined capacity of 4 GW) will remain in service throughout 2022 (Isar 2, Emsland and Neckarwestheim 2).

And per the article just like every other county that is deeply rooted in Coal mining they can't detach as easily due to the long history (see the US).
 

Bloody Brian Burke

#1 CFL Fan!
36,216
11,532
1,033
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Location
West Toronto, BC
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,152.09
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Per this I am not sure they are 100% related since Nuclear was only supplying 11% of the energy in 2020.



And per the article just like every other county that is deeply rooted in Coal mining they can't detach as easily due to the long history (see the US).
Less to do with current generation and more to do with heating and industrial use which makes up the bulk of German gas usage. A lack of reliable gas sources means a re-balancing of what they use the little gas they get on. If home & workplace heating transitions to a more reliable source like electricity in the form of heat pumps, for example, they're going to have to generate more power and the only option to generate more power with the nukes offline and natgas not possible is coal right now.

Further, if they're serious about phasing out that coal by 2030 like they say they're going to need more natgas regardless even if they keep growing their wind/solar generation since those modes can experience shortages due to lack of wind/sunshine and are hard to transmit from their generation locations (ie: the North Sea) to where it's needed most (ie: Rhine-Ruhr, Bavaria etc.). You need that backup.

Which is why Scholz went to Trudeau in the fall to try and convince him to build a pipeline to New Brunswick and a new LNG facility there (*laughs at this in Quebecois and 45 Native languages*) and then signed a huge deal with Qatar to supply LNG instead.
 

thedddd

Well-Known Member
36,655
17,274
1,033
Joined
Sep 2, 2010
Location
Pittsburgh
Hoopla Cash
$ 201.37
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Less to do with current generation and more to do with heating and industrial use which makes up the bulk of German gas usage. A lack of reliable gas sources means a re-balancing of what they use the little gas they get on. If home & workplace heating transitions to a more reliable source like electricity in the form of heat pumps, for example, they're going to have to generate more power and the only option to generate more power with the nukes offline and natgas not possible is coal right now.

Further, if they're serious about phasing out that coal by 2030 like they say they're going to need more natgas regardless even if they keep growing their wind/solar generation since those modes can experience shortages due to lack of wind/sunshine and are hard to transmit from their generation locations (ie: the North Sea) to where it's needed most (ie: Rhine-Ruhr, Bavaria etc.). You need that backup.

Which is why Scholz went to Trudeau in the fall to try and convince him to build a pipeline to New Brunswick and a new LNG facility there (*laughs at this in Quebecois and 45 Native languages*) and then signed a huge deal with Qatar to supply LNG instead.
That is why the whole tweet is misleading. The evacuation of the nuclear plants really has nothing to do with the new coal plant, their intentions of stress testing coming into 2022 really didn't take into consideration Russia going to war. That is 100% on them not planning properly for the stress test and shouldn't have blamed a war. Which as we know EVERY government does just like all private sector industries do also to help make an excuse to raise rates/lower production.

You could ask why not keep the nuclear plants running? Well that would be too easy, but unfortunately the plants/age make it a risky proposition, just like the disposal of all nuclear waste, since Germany already planned on the shutting them down.
 

Bloody Brian Burke

#1 CFL Fan!
36,216
11,532
1,033
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Location
West Toronto, BC
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,152.09
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
That is why the whole tweet is misleading. The evacuation of the nuclear plants really has nothing to do with the new coal plant, their intentions of stress testing coming into 2022 really didn't take into consideration Russia going to war. That is 100% on them not planning properly for the stress test and shouldn't have blamed a war. Which as we know EVERY government does just like all private sector industries do also to help make an excuse to raise rates/lower production.

You could ask why not keep the nuclear plants running? Well that would be too easy, but unfortunately the plants/age make it a risky proposition, just like the disposal of all nuclear waste, since Germany already planned on the shutting them down.
That's fair but there is precedent in reversing course on nuke closures - Ontario's condemned Pickering Nuclear I think three times now and each time they've reversed course and extended it a few years (and now plan to refurbish and add reactors).

The dumb thing was the closures to begin with though.
 

thedddd

Well-Known Member
36,655
17,274
1,033
Joined
Sep 2, 2010
Location
Pittsburgh
Hoopla Cash
$ 201.37
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3

dash

Money can't buy happiness, but it can buy bacon
131,421
39,566
1,033
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Location
City on the Edge of Forever
Hoopla Cash
$ 71.82
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top