Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

green energy (Germany) beat nuclear energy(France) in cost effiency!

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by frank wall View Post
    I'd say renewables are quite expensive in the construction phase. Lower costs once operational. If you want to construct an offshore windfarm or a dam for hydroelectric energy, costs mount very quickly. Also the nuclear issue is causing losses - the decommissioning process is lengthy, costly and complex for the German energy firms.
    this is a problem in the REST of the WORLD but not in GERMANY....

    because you get a credit from the KFW bank.

    "Germans" think in a longer Therm like "1000years" and they also life in the "future" because of there "Language"

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Bbox View Post
      When speaking about green energy, please don't forget that the actual plant (where green electricity is produced) is only half the story. The problem is, you have to produce just enogh electricity to cover the actual demand in each moment. So at 10% green energy in the whole system, it's easy, but if you would like to go 100% green, you have to store the electricity when available and release it when needed. The only way I know of is flooding a higher altitude region by pumping water uphil when there is to much electricity and then driving a classic water plant whe demand is higher. I can't imagine the cost for this, let alone the environmental impact.
      you can get 100% green without any "storage power plants" because you can built a smart grid and

      "negative energy power plants" and no i don't mean a power plant at all i mean a "energy consumer" with the "smartness" of only consume energy if green energy is Available.
      for a example a aluminum melt you can turn it on if green energy is Available.
      or a cool house or refrigerator you only turn it on if green energy is Available and you use the negative temperature as a storage for example you can operate at -27C up to -15C if green energy is Available then you cool it down to -27C and then turn of the refrigerator if green energy is rare.


      "The only way I know of is flooding a higher altitude region"

      now you know a second way.

      and there are even more ways in a smart grid over a large range you can cover the energy sources

      wave power plant cover solar power and solar and wind power covers Osmotic power and earth thermal power covers a wood-gas power plant and this call is covered by a biomass power plant and this is coverd by a biogas plant and this is covered by cold fusion and so one and so one.

      now you get the clue no storage power plant are needed if you really strike all together!

      Comment


      • #18
        Alternate sources

        Qaridarium,

        Please check Lewis Page on the register. He's not one of my favorite authors there because his bias towards nuclear energy (so I see it) but I think he's right about this one.

        One example: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/16/wind_power_rip/

        Fact is I can see every month on my bill the price of this 'green' energy. Which apparently is cheaper because is subsidied by everyone of us. Remove this 'incentives' and suddenly the 'green' energy is a lot pricier.

        D

        Comment


        • #19
          "Fact is I can see every month on my bill the price of this 'green' energy. Which apparently is cheaper because is subsidied by everyone of us. Remove this 'incentives' and suddenly the 'green' energy is a lot pricier."

          Fact is, you don't see the amount of taxes you pay for nuclear, the police for the transports, etc. nuclear is NOT cheaper, otherwise energy companies would build huge amounts of power plants. Recently they said they want to have subsidies again otherwise there is no margin, so guess what's expensive...

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Decebal View Post
            Qaridarium,

            Please check Lewis Page on the register. He's not one of my favorite authors there because his bias towards nuclear energy (so I see it) but I think he's right about this one.

            One example: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/16/wind_power_rip/

            Fact is I can see every month on my bill the price of this 'green' energy. Which apparently is cheaper because is subsidied by everyone of us. Remove this 'incentives' and suddenly the 'green' energy is a lot pricier.

            D
            he is wrong because a wind-miller only gets ~0,06€ per 1kWh if you backup it with a natural GAS power plant it costs 0,10€ per 1kWh this means you get a price range from 0,06-0,10€ maybe a peak load to this means 0,15€ and you pay 0,25€ in Germany.

            this means your price is so high because of the PROFIT of the Energy companies not because of GREEN energy.

            also you can't read the subsidies for COAL on your BILL and you can't read the subsidies for NUCLEAR on your BILL

            a base load power cost 0.04€ in Germany ad your "0,03€ for green energy" to this and you get 0.07€ LOL!

            a energy company in germany buy the power for 0,04€ and sell it to you for 0.25€ ! its 625% Profit and only 0.03€ is for "green" energy

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
              also you can't read the subsidies for COAL on your BILL and you can't read the subsidies for NUCLEAR on your BILL
              There are no subsidies for nuclear power in Germany.
              However, there is a tax on nuclear fuel which is equal to 80 times the worth of the fuel itself. Some regional courts have ruled it unconstitutional. Proceeds from the tax are used to finance subsidies for the competition (coal and renewables).
              Despite Q's vehement insistence that there is no subsidy for green energy in Germany, there in fact is a large subsidy, though most of it is not paid by the government. You pay an addtional surcharge on all electricity you buy, but only the 'green' producers get this money, regardless of where your electricity really comes from.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Benjamin_L View Post
                Fact is, you don't see the amount of taxes you pay for nuclear, the police for the transports, etc. nuclear is NOT cheaper, otherwise energy companies would build huge amounts of power plants. Recently they said they want to have subsidies again otherwise there is no margin, so guess what's expensive...
                The police is only needed because lots of deluded idiots want to protest.
                The only civilian ever killed by nuclear waste died in these protests. He tied himself to the tracks after a curve. The train driver couldn't see him and ran over him. Google "Sebastien Briat".
                The protests are scheduled to happen when reprocessed waste is returned to Germany after being reprocessed in France. The Germans are OK with nuclear waste leaving their country, but are not happy when it is returned to them after it is made less dangerous and shorter-lived.

                Nuclear is very cheap to keep running but expensive to build. The build cost could be lowered a lot if the public wasn't so paranoid.
                'they said they want to have subsidies again' - you are probably referring to the UK. The nuclear power plant builders did not want subsidies, they wanted guaranteed minimum prices for electricity. There is no transfer of money from the government to NPPs involved.

                Comment


                • #23
                  So all participants of demonstrations that don't fit your view are deluded idiots? Great understanding of democracy. Those people have the right to and a valid reason (if this reason might only be valid for them, fine, minorities are important as well) to demonstrate. If the energy companies would have to pay the police and the final storage, which isn't resolved until now (for how many decades now?) then nuclear wouldn't be great at all for them. Nuclear is only fine for the companies to make the big money and as they don't get money by building new plant (otherwise they'd do it) they try to increase the lifetime of their plants. Also those companies don't like the decentralization renewables inherit so all this debate and lobbyism is not due to cheap energy (as if those companies would care about this at all, haha).

                  We have to go 100% renewable anyway, so do it now and improve the technology. As you can see in Germany, energy prices are decreasing, which is a win-win-situation.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Benjamin_L View Post
                    So all participants of demonstrations that don't fit your view are deluded idiots? Great understanding of democracy. Those people have the right to and a valid reason (if this reason might only be valid for them, fine, minorities are important as well) to demonstrate.
                    They could demonstrate in a way that does not require spending lots of money on security.
                    The protest is also totally pointless. No matter what they do, the train is going to get to its destination. Storing German waste in France is prohibited by international law.

                    Originally posted by Benjamin_L View Post
                    If the energy companies would have to pay the police
                    It's not the energy companies who organize these protests. Ideally the protesters should pay for security.

                    Originally posted by Benjamin_L View Post
                    and the final storage, which isn't resolved until now (for how many decades now?) then nuclear wouldn't be great at all for them.
                    The situation is not resolved because the anti-nuclear fanatics oppose any solution. The only acceptable solution to them is if the waste just disappeared without trace, which is impossible. I also don't understand how shutting down nuclear power plants will help, because it will not make the waste disappear.
                    There's also the fact that nuclear waste is far less dangerous than these people think. There was a natural reactor in Gabon 2 billion years ago, and when it was discovered in 1976 its waste was still there, barely moved - even though it wasn't protected in any way and exposed to groundwater all this time. Google 'natural nuclear reactor'.

                    Originally posted by Benjamin_L View Post
                    Also those companies don't like the decentralization renewables inherit so all this debate and lobbyism is not due to cheap energy (as if those companies would care about this at all, haha).
                    This whole decentralization things is an illusion, because most of the renewable energy is generated in huge facilities. The reliability of this 'decentralized' renewable system is abysmally low, see here:
                    http://uvdiv.blogspot.com/2010/03/up...wntime_07.html

                    Originally posted by Benjamin_L View Post
                    We have to go 100% renewable anyway, so do it now and improve the technology.
                    It's impossible to run a major industrialized country on intermittent wind and solar power alone. This strategy will result in complete dependence on natural gas, mainly imported from Russia, and it's exactly what we see happening right now in Germany and Denmark: more and more Russian gas is being burned, emissions are essentially static and energy prices increase. The true solution is breeder reactors, which would work 24/7 and use very small quantities of fuel: 1 ton of uranium would be enough to power a 1 million city for a year.

                    Originally posted by Benjamin_L View Post
                    As you can see in Germany, energy prices are decreasing, which is a win-win-situation.
                    This only happens in Q's fantasy world. There are several points which were omitted:
                    1. The original claim refers to a report about the spot price of electricity, which is not how the majority of consumers purchases it. This price can very unpredictably.
                    2. Spot trading of electricity is far less prevalent in the French market. If you look at the report, French trading volume amounted to less than 1/5 of German volume, but the total amount of electricity generated yearly in these two countries is similar.
                    3. If German energy prices were indeed falling on average, the aluminium manufacturer would have no reason to file for bankruptcy.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Tweenk View Post
                      There are no subsidies for nuclear power in Germany.
                      LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

                      this is a lie !

                      a german video about this :

                      back in 1950 to 2012 and future.... the subsidies are: research funds, development aid, discounted plots , State takeover of the disposal cost , State cost-capping of the liability insurance .Government allowed monopole prices for electric energy
                      in numbers
                      1950-2010 = 100 billion dollars of direct Subsidies
                      1950-2010= 150 billion dollars of TAX reducing bonus
                      2010-Future= 140 billion dollars of bonus
                      this is 0,043€ per 1kWh electric nuclear energy

                      and this are only the facts fro the video without the "State cost-capping of the liability insurance and disposal costs "
                      also the castor transportcosts are not included in this calculation.

                      now what? i prove that you are a big LIAR!

                      Originally posted by Tweenk View Post
                      Despite Q's vehement insistence that there is no subsidy for green energy in Germany, there in fact is a large subsidy, though most of it is not paid by the government.
                      another lie its not a subsidy because the Worth of the "energy" is higher than the payment studies prove that Germany save 5,5 cent per 1kWh GREEN energy by only costs of 3,3 cent per 1kWh because of the merit order effect!

                      http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merit-O...t-Order-Effekt

                      so now i prove a second lie in your single post!

                      Originally posted by Tweenk View Post
                      You pay an addtional surcharge on all electricity you buy, but only the 'green' producers get this money, regardless of where your electricity really comes from.
                      if the green energy doesn't hit the market with the Merit-Order-Effekt then you have to pay 5,5 cent per 1kWh for dirty energy instead of the 3,3 cent per 1kWh for green energy !

                      because of this you SAVE money on green energy !

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Tweenk View Post
                        there is a tax on nuclear fuel which is equal to 80 times the worth of the fuel itself. Some regional courts have ruled it unconstitutional. Proceeds from the tax are used to finance subsidies for the competition (coal and renewables).
                        another lie and myth now we check the reality only on german language:



                        in fact its a lie! because they deduct the costs to improve the safety of the nuclear power plants from and in the end ZERO money goes into renewable energy sources…

                        the LAW is a 100% fake government cost-capping on the costs to improve the nuclear reactor security this means they only have to pay 40% of the real costs and the other 60% costs to improve the security is payed by the Civilians by TAX Cheating.

                        you don't know this part of the law? then start to read you NOOB!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I'd like to expand a bit on what Tweenk wrote. One point of universal agreement is that we need electricity 24 hours per day. There is always something consuming electricity, especially in places such as hospitals, etc. The end result of the above point is that there is a base electrical load that must be provided every hour of every day. Hence, we need a source of electricity large enough to supply this base load at all times. This is not a problem a smart grid can fix, and the only solutions are power generation sources that operate 24/7 or electrical reserves, such as flywheels or high-elevation water sources such as England is proposing.

                          Moving on to renewable energy, hydro, geothermal, and wave energy could be used to supply this base load, whereas wind and solar could only supply this base load while they operate. Hence, any grid looking to capitalize on unsteady power generation means must develop ways of storing excess electricity from high solar or wind generation periods. As it stands, even in Germany, there is very little in the way of electrical storage. Until sufficient electrical reservoirs are constructed, base load generation from nuclear or coal are necessary.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by wazoo42 View Post
                            I'd like to expand a bit on what Tweenk wrote. One point of universal agreement is that we need electricity 24 hours per day. There is always something consuming electricity, especially in places such as hospitals, etc. The end result of the above point is that there is a base electrical load that must be provided every hour of every day. Hence, we need a source of electricity large enough to supply this base load at all times. This is not a problem a smart grid can fix, and the only solutions are power generation sources that operate 24/7 or electrical reserves, such as flywheels or high-elevation water sources such as England is proposing.
                            you make a big mistake here you think a Solar power plant can not operate 24/7 right? you are wrong!
                            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_updraft_tower
                            this is solar power and operate 24/7 in full load.
                            and you also think a smart grid can not backup this? you are also wrong because they built cables from germany to Norway to use there Water power plants as a Storage power plant AND THIS IS a SMART GRID solution!
                            then you can fill up there water power plants with german wind and solar energy and in the night if you don't have wind or "updraft tower" you can use there water energy.

                            also Osmotic power plants and wave power plants also operate 24h/7day per week.

                            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osmotic_power

                            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_power


                            Originally posted by wazoo42 View Post
                            Moving on to renewable energy, hydro, geothermal, and wave energy could be used to supply this base load, whereas wind and solar could only supply this base load while they operate.
                            wrong a updraft tower is a solar power plant and operate 24/7 ! also a smart grid network worldwide makes it unlikely that there isn't any wind blowing WORLDWIDE.

                            and i know you dont know anything about the updraft tower because of this i help you: the sun heats the water in the black water tanks and this heats up the water and in the night the water heats up the air and the hot air drives the windmills in the updraft tower.

                            Originally posted by wazoo42 View Post
                            Hence, any grid looking to capitalize on unsteady power generation means must develop ways of storing excess electricity from high solar or wind generation periods. As it stands, even in Germany, there is very little in the way of electrical storage. Until sufficient electrical reservoirs are constructed, base load generation from nuclear or coal are necessary.
                            necessary? LOL Osmotic power plants are better for the base-load because they operate nonstop and don't need any maintenance like nuclear power plants.

                            also a updraft tower is cheaper than nuclear power if you built it very large and in the dessert.

                            and in the updraft tower you can use it as a greenhouse to produce tomatos and plants

                            you can turn dessert into greenland with a updraft tower because the updraft tower cools in the hot day and warm it up in the cold night.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                              1950-2010 = 100 billion dollars of direct Subsidies
                              1950-2010= 150 billion dollars of TAX reducing bonus
                              2010-Future= 140 billion dollars of bonus
                              this is 0,043€ per 1kWh electric nuclear energy
                              What is the source of these numbers? These sums are several times the construction costs of all German nuclear power plants. Links to German-only videos are not very useful.

                              Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                              another lie its not a subsidy because the Worth of the "energy" is higher than the payment studies prove that Germany save 5,5 cent per 1kWh GREEN energy by only costs of 3,3 cent per 1kWh because of the merit order effect!
                              This is completely unintelligible to me. What exactly are you arguing? That renewable energy is given extra money, yet it is actually cheaper than fossil fuel burning?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                                another lie and myth now we check the reality only on german language:
                                If a leftist / Green politician is your idea of a reliable source on nuclear power, then you are a lost case.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X