Germany’s legislature voted Friday to sharply cut back on subsidies and other financial incentives supporting green energy due to the strain wind and solar power placed on the country’s electricity grid.
[…] Germany’s wind and solar power systems have provided too much power at unpredictable times, which damaged the power grid and made the system vulnerable to blackouts. Grid operators paid companies $548 million to shutter turbines to fix the problem, according to a survey by Wirtschaftswoche of Germany’s largest power companies.
Canada is a monkey-see-monkey-do nation. After 6 years of Obama envy they ended up electing their own in the Spawn. After how many years will we look at the corrective behavior of Germany regarding their Ontario-inspiring tilt to Wind and solar boondoggles.
You can’t expect the Wynne administration to admit or reverse it’s mistakes while the same administration is in power.
Not bluidy lackley. It just isn’t done, old chap.
You may have seen this scam by a restaurant in your area.
Food inspectors finally threaten to shut a sub-standard rat infested shithole down.
(in real life it can take 9-12 years of chronic mismanagement and the selling of crap food for good money)
What do the owners do? They sell it to one of their relatives for $1 and put up a sign that says, “Under New Management.”.
But it really isn’t under new management, The same people run the place. The change has been purely cosmetic.
And the kicker is, …that the 9-12 year grace clock starts again from zero.
Why am I writing this? The baddies have to be deposed. Deposing the leader of the baddies and then trusting their successor who enabled the bad policy just doesn’t cut it or make fundamental change in policy.
So Merkel’s CDU has seen the light concerning wind and solar. Just when an election is looming.
What about axing nuclear?
That is the big mistake. Germany is still not going to have a regrettable nuclear incident due to a tsunami.
How does one excuse that kind of insane policy?
It didn’t do any good here in Alberta to have Stelmach quit and be replaced by Redford.
It didn’t do any good to have Redford quit and be replaced by Prentice.
The thrust of the policy remained the same, the party remains the same. New management.
They are all tainted.
The progressives have to go, not just a cosmetic management replacement.
If people saw the kitchens in most restaurants they wouldn’t eat there.
As for governments, the so-called ‘democratic’ system is fundamentally flawed. It’s based on picking people who are ‘popular’ not people best qualified for the job. This quote describes it well:
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.
Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage. Attributed to Alexander Tytler
and now you have explained why a ridicules concept such as kristianity survives
And Brad Wall’s government, which everyone insisted it was absolutely critical to vote for, continues to heroically follow this path of failure. Whomever you vote for, they all are going to the same place; your only choice is ahead slow or flank speed. Energy poverty everywhere. Or to paraphrase, a boot stamping on a human face forever.
Looked for confirmation of this article in mainstream media – nothing!
“and now you have explained why a ridicules concept such as kristianity survives”
What isn’t explain is how the public school system can create someone as illiterate as you. Grade 3 Remedial Spelling?
Agreed. Nuclear power is synonymous with the age of reason (notwithstanding the obsolete and primitive Soviet design and operational failure in Chernobyl).
Idiot enviromentalists and their stupid windturbines i hear where there’s one place when only eight homes have their power from Windturbines and the things are hazerdoius to birds and bats How about if they could harness all that Hot Air then Gore,Obama a bunch of politcians and all those eco-wackos could be put to good use
“Politicians are the lowest form of life on earth.”
General George S. Patton
“It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged.”
– G.K. Chesterton
My PG&E bill just DOUBLED from June to July. And no … I don’t even HAVE air conditioning. The summer months are ALWAYS the cheapest months by far for my energy usage. And no … there were NO lifestyle or other changes that would cause greater energy use. No, the CA PUC has allowed PG&E to simply RAISE rates and adjust the tier program to screw more ratepayers. The taxpayers and energy ratepayers are getting screwwed. Why ? Because the left has successfully made energy use a SIN. So they justify sticking it to everyone who has the temerity to actually turn lights on at nighttime. We are desperate for some of that Hope and Change promised by that fraud Obama
The first twister that goes through a Wind Farm will devastate the economical/social systems of that State or Province….Lights out
The usual storm damage to the Distribution (GRID) may takes months to repair, damage to Generation is game over…Repair to major Generation equipment will be measured in YEARS. The temporary backup systems are a short term solutions…Battery UPS/ Gens are not rated for continuous operation. (wear out fast)
JMHO
The problems with current green, renewable energy production aren’t mysterious. They’re well understood by everyone in the industry and those willing to take a little time to do research. Expensive ($ per MW of actual production – Brookings Institute), unreliable so it requires 100% backup by conventional power (at least doubling the costs), must be heavily subsidized by taxpayers ($ per MW of actual production), carbon footprint from production and installation is greater than the carbon reduction (Google engineers). Basically, green energy achieves none of its goals at an incredibly high cost.
Germany has discovered this expensive lesson but even now tries to mislead the public when it claims that green energy will be 40% of electricity *capacity*. At best, wind/solar produce at around 25% of capacity so actual production of green electricity will be around 10%. I’d bet that most of that 10% comes from biofuels. Wind and solar are complete failures under any metric except one : ideology.
Progressives so badly want to believe that current green technology can power a modern economy that they’re blind to all the failures, both economic and human costs. Similar to how communists can still cling to communism despite its complete failure for people and economies.
Freeman Dyson thinks this blindness is due to evolution. To paraphrase “it’s more importantly to be united than to be right”
http://www.thegwpf.com/freeman-dyson-scientific-dogmatism-still-alive/
While looking for the Dyson article, I came across another one by the former chief scientific adviser, the late Professor Sir David MacKay in the guardian of all places. After Brexit, the U.K. will have autonomy over its energy policies so it might want to consider MacKay’s advice.
“The sensible energy and climate change plan for the UK, MacKay said, was for the country to focus on nuclear power and carbon capture storage technology, which traps the carbon dioxide from fossil fuel burning. In that scenario, the amount of wind and solar the UK needed would be almost zero, he said.”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/03/idea-of-renewables-powering-uk-is-an-appalling-delusion-david-mackay?CMP=twt_a-environment_b-gdneco
Nuclear and CCS have problems too. Hinkley Point is a money pit and CCS still has substantial design and operational problems. I favor maximizing natural gas electricity and fracking. But, all three have the advantage of being reliable and stable. They also actually reduce CO2 emissions at a more reasonable cost.
BTW: Trivia
I have a sister who lives on a lake in Ontario…She complained to me that her neighbor has solar lights on his dock that interfere with her enjoyment (sight) of the lake at Night…She wants to get rid of them, short of using a shot Gun.. I suggested she try using a Taser to Zap them (multiple times)…No physical evidence that some serial/parallel cells are dead..
The standard Critical System Redundancy Design can overcome 2-3 “Component” failure modes, but
that type of failure redundancy is NOT expecting high energy pulses. The cell itself must have that protection. NOT
Think about it!….Do folks pushing Solar know ALL the vulnerability modes
Puzzles you, doesn’t it? 🙂
If only Elizabeth May would retweet that information, Kate!
🙂
LC Bennett: All very true, and impossible to point out to religiously motivated eco-zealots.
McGuinty and Wynne in Ont have squandered billions on the Utopian fantasy that electricity can be generated without using fuel. In addition to the obvious expenditures to Liberal connected wind outfits, is the opportunity cost of not investing in nuclear facilities. These are and will remain the major supplier in Ont’s generating system. A sober government could have trumpeted Ont green electricity, about 80% supplied by hydro and nuclear and skipped the wind/solar fiasco altogether. It is grandchildren who will pay for this colossal waste and mostly because Nuclear was not defined as a “renewable”.
Canada has one of the “cleanest” electricity production in the world because if its hydro and nuclear. The only reason Saskatchewan and Alberta went to coal was because they don’t have the hydro potential like the other big provinces. All the scolding by nags in hydro rich provinces doesn’t change that reality. If CAGW alarmists are adamant that coal must be phased out then at least do it gradually. In the medium term replace coal with natural gas as the coal plants reach the end of their lifespan. Supplement with hydro from BC and Manitoba. Add biofuel plants if that’s not enough. In the longer term plan to build next generation nuclear. Hopefully by then there will be small, modular nuclear plants. Don’t build one more kW of wind or solar. They’re a complete waste of money.
And to add to LC Bennett’s and Martin’s comments, it’s also odd that Ontario’s (and Canada’s) huge amount of forest doesn’t count for anything while it does for Russia.
Utopian fantasy that electricity can be generated without using fuel.
Why do you keep repeating this fallacy?
You still don’t understand how hydro dams work do you?
They don’t use any fuel to generate electricity.
Wind and solar also generate electricity without using fuel, but not very reliably or efficiently, and definitely not on a scale that can power cities.
Don’t try to be clever, be specific, and don’t lump all renewable energy sources together.
Hydroelectricity and small modular nuclear fueled with Thorium are the energy sources for the future.
you can’t build the turbines or solar panels without the use of fossil fuels. you can’t transport them without fossil fuels and you can’t run them without backup, fossil fuels.
Jean:
I guess it bears repeating. Specifically and I am always very clear I was referring to Ont.I did mention hydro as being a very important part of the Ont supply mix, thus have some idea how hydro generators work, this morning 18% of supply comes that source. Wynne, Naomi Klein, Gerald Butts most of the Ont green enthusiasts when talking of renewables don’t specifically mention hydro, they are focused on wind and solar, power without fuel.My point is that Ont could have emphasized a supply mix of nuclear, gas and hydro, today supplying 92% of electricity, which would be the envy of most other countries. Of this the hydro and nuclear shares could have been mentioned as green, clean efficient sources. Instead we have the present situation. The problem for Wynne and the others is that nuclear is a dirty word and not a “renewable”even though it generates the largest share of Ont power and will for some time.
Pay close attention… again. We are not talking about building anything. Martin specifically referred to generating electricity, not building the equipment to do that. You were called on that before. Got it now?
I completely agree with your point as you’ve stated it here at 10:03am.
I think we can agree that wind and solar can generate electricity without using fuel, but not very reliably or efficiently, and definitely not on a scale that can power cities.
The problem isn’t the technology per se, but rather the inappropriate use of it by stupid politicians that were elected by stupid people who unfortunately comprise the majority of voters.