The true cost of the green feltGraichen is only the tip of the iceberg. The felt led to a negatively cost-optimized energy turnaround.The German Federal Ministry of Economics and Climate Protection published the PDF "Photovoltaic Strategy" on May 5. Here we go to page 20: Excursus: Storage as a cross-sectional task. This is where the entire catastrophe is revealed when ideologues and dogmatists work on something they have no idea about. This is what comes out when you then seek advice from lobbyists. If these ideologues and dogmatists have already repeatedly come up with "more money for climate protection", then only one thing can come out of it: a negatively cost-optimized energy turnaround. To really understand the methodology behind this nonsense, here is a quote from Björn Peters on Twitter: At a seminar the other day, a senior representative from @AgoraEW. He had to listen to criticism because of insufficient mastery of scientific standards. His reaction: Criticism is "subversive of democracy. So they even believe that they ARE democracy. It's grotesque.
It says under point 1 on page 20: The wind and PV expansion paths anchored in the EEG lead to electricity production that matches energy demand as closely as possible over the course of the year. This, of course, provokes an examination of this "wind and PV expansion path." This is not just any study, but a legal text! It says until 2040, then constant 400 GW photovoltaic and 160 GW wind power on land. This graph shows December 1, 2022 to January 31, 2023. There 60 GW photovoltaic show almost nothing, there 58 GW wind power show times for weeks quite little to weeks quite significant. This graph shows June 1, 2022 to July 31, 2022. It immediately becomes clear that with 400 GW of photovoltaics and 160 GW of onshore wind power, there is a significant gap in winter that will need to be balanced with massive summer/winter offsets. Point 4 on page 20 on power to hydrogen and reconversion to electricity states: "Since this form of storage has the greatest energy losses of the measures mentioned here, electrolysers and hydrogen power plants are only used in the few hours of the year when the other options have been exhausted. What is meant by only a few hours? 5 hours? 50 hours? Are considerably more than 500 still "a few hours"? If the Federal Ministry of Economics and Climate Protection publishes something that is in grotesque contrast to the expansion plan published in the text of the EEG law, how can one judge the performance of this government? There is the ideologically dogmatic belief that "we can manage with almost no memory. The felt is so powerful that so far no one has vehemently contradicted it.
I have published a lot of videos on the energy transition. Why didn't this trigger a big discussion? Anyone who wants to live in the felt of the felt must not question ideology and dogma. See the above quote from Björn Peters, otherwise one is very quickly labeled as "subversive of democracy".
This is attacking the "we'll get there with almost no storage" nonsense, which is also in this PDF published on May 5, 2023 by the Federal Ministry of Economics and Climate Protection.
The cheapest method for a workable energy transition: Dedicate special building land around high-priced cities, paying for the lease with electricity delivered on demand.
But those who hate the family and the family home never dare to even think of such an idea.
Costs, security of supply, land use, impact assessment, and public acceptance must be considered for various forms of the energy turnaround must be discussed and evaluated. An optimal mix of sun, wind, grid expansion and various storage technologies must be worked out. For this a study that it would also be possible with 100% solar power.
One of the findings: CCGT power plants can run steadily for months in the winter half-year at 4,000 GWh batteries. Optimization for rapid load changes is completely unnecessary. The amount of underground gas storage required is very difficult to realize with hydrogen because 3.2 times more volume is needed than with methane.
In the past, the German energy transition consisted of 2 nonsensical dogmas: "Electricity demand will fall" and "We can manage almost without storage". It was not until 2016 that the dogma "electricity demand will fall" was abandoned as untenable.
This shows that this felt is anything but harmless; it can destroy entire industries that have been painstakingly built up.
As early as 2008, I called for solar and wind power to be fed into the grid on demand by means of intermediate storage in batteries. 15 years later, this has still not been included in the EEG.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
