The Great Wealth Transfermation – Shift To 100% Renewables Would Cost Each German Household Additional $1000 Per Month!

We’ve all heard about Hans Schellnhuber’s masterplan for the Great Transformation of society, from one powered by “climate killing” fossil fuel energies to one powered by gentle, earth-healing renewable energies.

Well, it turns out that the Great Transformation would likely end up being the Great Transfer-mation – of private wealth!

The online Die Rheinpfalz here reports that if Germany succeeded in shifting to renewable energy, it would cost each German household €800.00 per month, or almost €10,000 ($13,000) per year, this according to calculations by physicist Gerd Ganteför of the University of Konstanz.

What benefit would all that money possibly lead to? Firstly, lots of government interference in private lives. Secondly, maybe a few undetectable hundredths of a degree Celsius of less warming. Indeed no endeavour in human history would cost so much and yet deliver so little to society as a whole. Thirdly, it would make (and has made) a few people outrageously rich.

Online Die Rheinphalz writes:

Covering the entire German energy demand of 2500 billion kwh per year – that includes heating, transportation and a large part of industry – with green technology would be impossible says the expert of the University of Konstanz. That would entail additional costs of 800 euros per household per month, and that is unaffordable,’ says Ganteför.”

But that’s not the way a group of green zealots see it. They actually believe we can’t afford not to take the unaffordable path of green energy, otherwise the earth will burn up. And a lot of interest groups and industries are just salivating over the prospects of such a massive transfer of wealth. Indeed many slimy European politicians from all parties have vested interests in green energy.

Ganteför points out that these extreme costs would not be bearable, and so they would lead to massive reductions in the use of electricity by private and business consumers, and so lead to a…:

…considerable change of lifestyle for every individual. Individual transportation and business production would have to be massively scaled back.”

But this is precisely what these green zealots want (IMHO). They want humankind to move back into the mud, to be completely humiliated – and to get very rich while inflicting the pain.

25 responses to “The Great Wealth Transfermation – Shift To 10025 Renewables Would Cost Each German Household Additional $1000 Per Month!”

  1. DirkH

    The German Greens have a top tier of old communists and extreme leftists who are just power-hungry and who hopped on the anti nuclear movement in the late 70ies/early 80ies because it was the vehicle for the politization of the masses. As soon as they’re in power they’ll keep up the Green rethoric but “unfortunately” they will have to let the masses wait for the promised Nirvana and do the same kind of Realpolitik mixed with cronyism we see now. Like Lenin had to let the masses wait for the fruits of real communism.

    Low-ranking Greens might believe in the vision, but not the top tier. The 100% renewable vision is only a means to an end, like the color green.

  2. DirkH

    Oh, and just for the record, some EU bureaucrat says that “Climate Change is a bigger crisis than the financial crisis” so he says the EU wants a continuation of the Kyoto protocol.

    Obviously the EU member states want to earn money through the ETS auctioning:

    Or in other words: The manufactured climate change crisis is used as a means to reduce the deficits; at least that is the plan.

  3. DirkH

    Thinking further about this, killing off Nuclear in Germany was a great move to increase future revenue from CO2 ETS auctioning.

  4. Bob in Castlemaine

    Doesn’t the sequence go something like this.
    100% renewable energy at prices that will close down industry or force it’s relocation to jurisdictions without carbon dioxide taxes.
    >> Huge job losses, ballooning unemployment payments, massive welfare budget blow-out.
    >> Additional revenue from CO2 taxes swallowed by black hole created by decimation of the tax base.
    Or something along those lines.
    Meanwhile here in Australia our government will soon be introducing the world’s biggest carbon dioxide tax?

  5. Edward

    This bloke, truly – says it all for me PG.

    A great man and a human being, a humble bloke too, may God bless him!

  6. Billy

    I have been involved in the construction of much of the electrical generation and distribution in my area, so I am not totally ignorant of the subject.

    I cannot comprehend how a 100% renewable system could provide useful electricity at any price. Service would be so unreliable that it would not be worth connecting at all. Wind can be unavailable for weeks at a time and dark rainy weather can last for months. Storage, if it was available would need to have months of capacity and massive redundant generation would be needed to recharge it quickly or it would be useless. Storage would have to be able to replace the present capacity of coal and nuclear assets for extended periods, not just a few hours of peaking. Never mind the money, is there enough land and material available to do this? Will the true believers ever understand that this cannot work?

    Nations will run out of money before this plan is completed.

    1. DirkH

      Of the renewable energy in germany that is not hydropower; Biomass contributes as much as wind and solar together, and that’s even a controllable power source. (You are right, though, that there’s not enough money to complete the plan)

      In other news; we heard that the Danes tax fat in food now. Could it be that they are keen to use the fat for renewable energy instead of feeding it to humans?
      Handelsblatt reports about energy from fat in Austria.
      They run a ship’s Diesel with used deep-fry fat from restaurants. Bypassing the humans altogether would open up the way for a great new renewable energy source.

      How about using the obesity epidemic as a health reason for EU-wide calory rationing. Think about all the kWh we could produce sustainably.

      1. Sun GCR

        This might not be such a far-fetched idea:

  7. Ulrich Elkmann

    “Nations will run out of money before this plan is completed”: That depends. If “money” means legal tender honored by outside parties, you’re right. If you mean tokens enforced by the state regardless of value generated or commodities traded, you have the socialist business model. You still run out, but not of this “money”.

    1. DirkH

      Printing paper money doesn’t help either; you end up with the Zimbabwean solution. Even the US can’t do it.

  8. R. de Haan
  9. R. de Haan

    There is no wealth transfer.
    The money disappears in a big dark hole.
    It’s plain waste and… it can’t be done.

    100% renewables is fiction and “Green Energie” doesn’t exist.

  10. R. de Haan

    This is a much more realistic solution.

    And we have plenty of it.

  11. Ulrich Elkmann

    “Plenty” is an understatement in the classic English (PC: “British”) sense of that word. Keep in mind that the numbers published (which are steadily increasing, exponentially as it seems) are only preliminary results based on first exploratory drillings. The bitter irony is the fracking process is already being demonized in Germany as successfully as GM crops have been. Since gas is bound to be one of the prime energies here for many decades to come, the Germans will end up importing shale gas from Eastern Europe (excepting Russia, if the Russians ever try the kind of extortion they tried out on Belarus and the Ukraine) while screaming Bloody Hell over every well put down that the state media show them to fuel the Fifteen Minute Hate, even if these have been proven to be as safe, as, well, GM crops. Seems the word I’m looking for is “hypocrites”…

    1. DirkH

      A better word is “suicidal”.

      1. DirkH

        Suicidal. Imagine you’re a party coming third in an election and you have the opportunity to go into a coalition with the party that came first. The city where you won that election is in a near-constant state of gridlock and a stretch of Autobahn is planned to alleviate the situation. And it has been in planning for ages. Now, all you need to do is agree with your coalition partner that it will be built. The city doesn’t even have to pay for it as federal money pays for it.

        What do you do?

        Well, you demand NOT to build the Autobahn and refuse to rule together with your coalition partner when you’re the Berlin Greens.

        I rest my case.

  12. Ulrich Elkmann

    Now behold this:
    “MAGDEBURG, Germany | Tue Oct 4, 2011 3:43pm EDT
    (Reuters) – German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Tuesday solar energy subsidies should be reduced, and it could make more sense in the future to draw solar energy from places like Greece, where the sun shined longer.
    Merkel said that while wind energy seemed on track to becoming commercially viable in Germany, this did not seem the case for solar energy.
    Already over the past two years, Germany has sharply reduced so-called feed-in tariffs, through which investors receive a guaranteed return on generated energy output.”
    Where the sun “shined”? This is usually used for the transitive form of the verb, i.g. “to make bright/to polish,” or
    “shine” (so) definition tv.
    to insult someone; to deceive someone. : Stop shining me.
    (Dictionary of American Slang and Colloquial Expressions by Richard A. Spears.Fourth Edition. Copyright 2007. Published by McGraw Hill.)

    1. DirkH

      One must not forget that it was Schroeder’s Red-Green government that pumped the solar scheme up, and that Merkel’s CDU was always only half-hearted behind it – they wanted to reap some Green Jobs fame, and couldn’t just cut off all the subsidies for new installations without making a few ten thousands unemployed. So politically they couldn’t kill it, they just choked it a little by cutting down the subsidies by 20% a year over the past few years.

      Merkel is always good for constant adjustments of her direction.

  13. DirkH

    Even renewable energy pioneers need to relax from time to time…

    in their Ferraris and Lamborghinis.

  14. Here’s what McGuinty’s “insane Green plan” for Ontario looks like! « The Big Green Lie

    […] The Great Wealth Transfermation – Shift To 100% Renewables Would Cost Each German, (Ontario) Hou… […]

  15. biggreenlie

    Thanks for your in depth coverage of your Green Nightmare” that has been going on in Germany. We over here in Ontario, Canada are about to find out how “brutal” this agenda really is on the homes and lives of our Citizens.
    A power-mad group of Politicians and disgusting Investors along with their “cloaked in green” NGO’s are working us over like a bunch of “rented mules!”…………try and tell THE PEOPLE and they just stare at you like you have two heads!
    Sad times………….

  16. Juraj V.

    Yesterday I traveled with my German colleague through Austria. Seeing so many wind turbines there, I remarked “inefficient solution of non-existing problem”. Discussion started; he is a truly obedient citizen. Fukushima killed thousands (and if not, it will soon), turbines will be also competitive soon, switching off nuclear in Germany is good. He did not believed Germany is partially running on Czech and Polish electricity. Oh my.
    Since on company party I spoke about German politicians as of generation Bader-Meinhoff, German colleagues carefully avoid any political discussion with me, except the former DDR ones 😀

    1. nofreewind

      It’s amazing how people who are seemingly intelligent choose to be completely ignorant of simple to find facts. It’s almost a universal phenomena these days.

  17. Ulrich Elkmann

    “Germany is partially running on Czech and Polish electricity” (& French -and it’s all nuclear): another aspect we should expect: once the winter starts in the and “the juice” is needed where it is produced, we can expect Merkel & Cie. to put pressure on our eastern neighbors – appealing to “common European destiny” and “solidarity”. Calling it threatening and blackmail would be “not very helpful” (A. Merkel) – or would that be “doubleplusungood” already?

    1. DirkH

      They’ve been saying “European destiny” a lot these days… You don’t use the word “destiny” while you’re winning…

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy