German Consumers Paying Record Amount For Green Energy …Energiewende On “Best Path To Financial Disaster”

Wind Turbine kaputtThe online daily Berliner Zeitung (BZ) here reports that German consumers in 2015 have “never paid so much money for supporting renewable energy.”

Wind energy is hugely expensive and doesn’t work well. Photo: NTZ

Some 15 years ago German Environment Minister, Jürgen Trittin, wanted the public to believe that Germany’s Energiewende (transition to renewable energies) would only cost consumers about as much as one scoop of ice cream per month. Since those famous words were spoken that scoop has ballooned to a jumbo bucket of Ben and Jerry’s.

Never have German consumers paid so much for electricity. Indeed one study concluded that the high cost of electricity in Germany is resulting in hundreds of thousands of German households having their power cut off because families can no longer afford the high electric bills – see here and here. It just goes to show that under reckless political management even a scoop of ice cream can become a luxury.

The BZ reports:

According to media reports, 24.1 billion euros were paid out to green energy producers last year. That is 2.6 billion euros, or 12 percent, more than in 2014.”

The costs are rising so fast that some leading politicians are (finally) beginning to sound the alarms. The BZ writes that leading conservative politician Michael Fuchs of Angela Merkel’s CDU party “fears the worst“, telling the flagship daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung that the Energiewende “is on the best path to becoming a financial disaster”.

And despite the massive investment, wind energy was only able to deliver 13% of Germany’s electricity needs last year – and that in a year which was a relatively windy one.

What will be the consequence of all the Bernie-Sanders-“free” green energy in the future? The Berliner Zeitung writes: “Higher costs”.

One reason for the higher costs, the BZ writes, is because of the governments plan to boost investment in offshore wind parks – and slow down the construction of onshore parks. The problem with that plan is that offshore wind energy is far more expensive. Offshore wind park operators are guaranteed up to 19.4 euro-cents per kilowatt-hour – which is some three times more than what onshore operators get.

And there’s still remains the problem of getting offshore wind energy to markets inland.

66 responses to “German Consumers Paying Record Amount For Green Energy …Energiewende On “Best Path To Financial Disaster””

  1. Green Sand

    “……RWE’s shares slump after dividend is scrapped”

    “….Chief executive Peter Terium said the decision to cancel the dividend for the 2015 financial year “did not come easily”, but was “necessary to strengthen our company” as the economic prospects for conventional power generators in RWE’s home German market have worsened.

    Germany wants to generate 80pc of its electricity from renewable sources by 2050 and has been subsidising green energy, such as wind and solar power, in recent years.

    This change in policy has flooded the market with state-subsidised renewable energy and coincided with a sharp global downturn in wholesale energy prices, heaping pressure on utility companies such as RWE and its rival Eon, which operate coal and gas-fired stations as well as nuclear plants…….”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/12161261/Npower-owner-RWEs-shares-slump-after-dividend-is-scrapped.html

  2. BobW in NC

    And over here in the U.S., not a word—not a SINGLE word—about the absolute disaster that wind energy has been for Germany. It is my hope and prayer that Germany can halt this likely pending disaster before it is too late.

    What’s the old proverb? “There are none so blind as those who WILL NOT

  3. BobW in NC

    And over here in the U.S., not a word—not a SINGLE word—about the absolute disaster that wind energy has been for Germany. It is my hope and prayer that Germany can halt this likely pending disaster before it is too late.

    What’s the old proverb? “There are none so blind as those who WILL NOT see.”

    God help us all!

  4. roger

    Energy, the Euro debacle, the heel on Greece’s throat, immigration…..’seems like a lot of bad calls over time are conspiring to bring the German Hegemony down at last.
    BREXIT Cannot come soon enough.

    1. DirkH

      “seems like a lot of bad calls over time are conspiring to bring the German Hegemony down at last.”

      Pan-Europa was designed following the plans layed out by Kalergi in 1925 in Praktischer Idealismus. He envisioned a technocratic rule by wise men, i.e. central planning, following the visions of Bacon / New Atlantis and the Soviet Union’s socialism perceived as model of the future at the time by political elites (von Mises was the only one who showed how economic planning is an information problem and cannot be achieved to any satisfying degree by centrally commanded price rigging).

      The all-pervading desasters caused by the Politkommissars of the EU are a collective Dunning-Kruger syndrome of a wannabe elite punch-drunk by their own greatness.

  5. Robin Pittwood

    And in 15 or 20 years time all the existing turbines will be wearing out. Who will clean up the broken parts on land and at sea? It will be an even greater financial nightmare than now, with economy and tatters as it tries to replace the failing generation, and piles and piles of mess. It is as if some of our leaders are intentionally destroying their own nations wealth and success for an ideology.

    1. David Appell

      Gee, who cleans up the broken parts from failing and obselete coal power plants?

      1. DirkH

        Maintaining or upgrading or dismantling one 1-GW powerplant versus doing the same to 6000 (six thousand) 1-MW wind turbines.

        I’ll pay you the same for each of these jobs.

        Then I’ll force you at gunpoint to choose the second.

        Socialism at work.

        1. David Appell

          Be sure to include all the costs of maintaining the coal mines, the miners, and the trains that transport coal to the power plant.

          1. AndyG55

            And the MASSIVE INCOME produced. !!

            Coal has provided for ALL the worlds development of the last 100 or more years, and COAL and other fossil fuels will continue to do so for at least the next 100 or so years.

            Wind and solar are TOYS, for children like you to worship.

          2. yonason
      2. AndyG55

        Many coal fired power station are 50+ year old. very few wind turdines or solar plants will last 10-15 years, and only then with massively expensive repairs and maintenance.

      3. David Johnson

        What a stupid comment.

      4. slk

        The “falling” pieces of old coal plants? Makes you sound completely uninformed and foolish. How about a comparison between the amount of material in a coal plant versus 500 wind turbines? Okay, 100 wind turbines. Wait, maybe only 10. I’m trying to make this work for you. Only 10 turbines but out nearly zip for energy, so the coal plant still wins.

    2. John F. Hultquist

      I don’t know if “intentionally” is the best descriptor but however it is characterized there is a lot of wealth being destroyed.

  6. handjive

    United Nations links affordable energy to quality of life:

    https://www.advancedenergyforlife.com/article/energy-access-key-better-life

    1. yonason

      AFFORDABLE ENERGY SPOTTED
      KEY PROSPERITY INFRASTRUCTURE IDENTIFIED
      TARGET ACQUIRED
      PROCEED TO DESTROY

  7. Graeme No.3

    Robin Pittwood:

    Once the blades are removed (or have broken off) the nacelle can be ‘mined’ for the copper and rare earths. The towers can be left as the home of bats and such birds as want them.

    1. DirkH

      Also, the 1000 ton concrete foundation can be dug out and erected as monument for future generations to behold.

      1. David Appell

        Maybe we can erect them alongside all the mountaintops that have been permanently flattened in the Appalachian mountains.

        1. slk

          You mean the ones they blasted flat for wind turbines? And the roads cut for hilltop roads and turbines? Quite a mess, it is.

    2. John F. Hultquist

      I don’t know if “intentionally” is the best descriptor but however it is characterized there is a lot of wealth being destroyed.

      Without the working parts on top the towers could be capped and retrofitted with the structures inside and holes leading to them that bats and birds could use. As built they would be useless.

      Dirk mentions the concrete foundation. There is a significant amount of steel therein (bars, threaded ends up, for attachment of the tower). Likely when the above ground parts are gone the foundation will be there for a long long time.

      1. David Appell

        “Likely when the above ground parts are gone the foundation will be there for a long long time.”

        And the climate change created by burning coal lasts at least 10,000 years.

        1. slk

          The life span of concrete is verifiable. The effect of increasing CO2 in the atmosphere is based on models and in no way verifiable. Try not to compare conjecture and fact.

          1. DirkH

            He is BTW talking complete rubbish.
            Carbon cycle: 150 Gt /year natural emissions, 150 Gt /yr absorption, 5 Gt human emissions.
            Human emissions are a more or less accurate estimate – natural emission and absorption are more like vaporware, as they can only be estimated using models themselves.

            Small changes in CO2 dissolution/solution at the ocean surface completely overwhelm CO2 emissions by humans.

            Look at the Keeling curve. Take the first derivative. Now. Do you see how the economic crises are visible , as industry reduces output? No? Me neither.

          2. DirkH

            Oh and another thing. Even while the gas exchange at the ocean surface is on the order of 20 times the human CO2 emissions, the warmunists claim that human-produced CO2 has been absorbed by the oceans to an extent that the number of H+ ions IN THE OCEANS has by now risen by THIRTY PERCENT (or 0.1 pH).

            The mismatch in orders of magnitude is just plain out in La La land, but what does that bother the warmunist scientist stand-in.

  8. sod

    From the article:

    “Die Folge war, dass die Preise für Strom im Großhandel an der Börse abermals massiv gefallen sind. Nach Berechnungen des Thinktanks Agora Energiewende waren es durchschnittlich noch 3,1 Cent pro Kilowattstunde – nach 3,5 Cent im Vorjahr. 2011 mussten sogar noch 5,6 Cent gezahlt werden. Die Konsequenz ist, dass der sogenannte Systempreis im vorigen Jahr gesunken ist: Die Summe aus EEG-Umlage und Strombeschaffungskosten lag noch bei 9,7 Cent pro Kilowattstunde nach knapp zehn Cent im Vorjahr. Elektrische Energie ist also in Wirklichkeit billiger geworden – allerdings wurde dies von den Versorgern kaum an die Verbraucher weitergegeben, stattdessen stiegen die Renditen der Unternehmen.”

    http://www.berliner-zeitung.de/wirtschaft/energiewende-so-teuer-kommen-uns-die-erneuerbaren,10808230,33522560.html#plx1946153509

    The priced of electricity on the market continues to FALL in Germany. Those that buy on the market pay less now.

    1. DirkH

      “The priced of electricity on the market continues to FALL in Germany. Those that buy on the market pay less now.”

      Bulk market prices have fallen because of state-mandated dumping of a product produced irrespective of demand. Green policies are socialist policies and destructive to profitability.
      I *KNEW* so I sold my EON stock years ago. Going short socialism is a winner all around the world.

      So thank you , german green socialist dimwits for making my day yet *AGAIN*. *NOTHING* is as easily predictable over *DECADES* as socialist failure.

  9. yonason

    A Cautionary Tale

    That picture of a wind turbine going “clunk, screech, bang” reminds me of this sad, careless and insensitive report of a tragedy.

    Proof of how gullible the MSM are, and hopefully a sobering illustration of why we should never take them at their word, especially when it involves anything as important as climate and energy.

    Warmists are those who deceive the MSM, and the MSM couldn’t be bothered with any real fact checking or obtaining responsible opposing views, of which there are many. Consequently a few get rich, and the masses are harmed, some fatally and get away with it.
    http://consumerist.com/2009/06/08/no-charges-in-case-of-utility-freezing-93-year-old-to-death/

    1. David Appell

      And where is the picture of the mercury dispersed by a coal power plant?

      Or the neurological damage it does to infants?
      The lung damage is does to everyone?

      1. yonason

        Sources for your idiotic paranoid drivel, please. They could prove amusing.

  10. David Appell

    The BZ reports:
    “According to media reports, 24.1 billion euros were paid out to green energy producers last year. That is 2.6 billion euros, or 12 percent, more than in 2014.”

    And how much damage is being done, to human health and the environment, by fossil fuels in Germany?

    In the US it’s at least $120 B/yr (in 2005; that’s now the equivalent of $140 in current dollars), or about $440 per American per year.

    $1,750 a year for a family of four.

    And this doesn’t include the costs of climate change.

    “Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use”
    National Research Council, 2010
    http://books.nap.edu/catalog/12794.html

    1. John F. Hultquist

      What a crock of bs that is.
      All of it made up.
      Not worth the CO2 produced in its making.
      Prove any of it or crawl into a hole.

      1. bit chilly

        a crock of bs at least has a use john. it can be dropped into some soil for fertilizer . nothing, absolutely nothing that comes from david appell is of use. quite possibly the most alarmist human being posting on the internet.

        i sometimes wonder how he can bear to get up out of bed in the morning as everything human beings do seems to worry him beyond belief.

        sadly the western developed world has got so comfortable it has now basically disappeared up its own arse. nothing short of a breakdown of society will bring the cold harsh reality of how tenuous that comfort really is and how harsh life can be . that is maybe what is required to put the david appells of this world back in their box for good.unfortunately history shows the human race is prone to repeating the mistakes of the past over and over again, so possibly not.

      2. David Appell

        John: Excuse me, but I’m going to take the results of the US National Academy of Sciences over your thoroughly well-reasoned and complete rational response.

        1. yonason

          @ David Appell

          Let’s see, “National Academy Of Sciences.” . . .

          Oh, here’s something on the kind of membership they attract.

          Levi Elected to National Academy of Sciences

          Reading beyond the title we see that the article proudly announces that she was awarded the…

          “ACTIVIST-SCHOLAR Award from ISA”

          And that is all I need to know about the “National Academy Of Sciencelessness.” For them, and the vast majority of institutions, both public and private, the activism takes precedence over the science.

          And THAT, David, is why we aren’t buying the mass produced socialist garbage you are selling.

          1. Mari C

            The NAS, once upon a time, may have provided a good service to our nation, advising on scientific matters. But as happens with all private entities devoted to government, they became politicized. They also need money for their “research” and where else to get it, now-a-days, than from a government wishing to pursue a green agenda? It’s a spiral, ever tighter, of governments being advised to fund research, and research showing what governments want to hear. Cloistered and secretive, members elected for life by the elite within, each seeking support and using the support of others to further The Agenda Du Jour, supporting in turn those who supported them. House of cards, really, and it will fall down. Only hope is that the NAS and others like them don’t take the rest of us down as well.

          2. yonason

            @ Mari C

            Yup.

    2. DirkH

      ““Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use”
      National Research Council, 2010”

      Hidden benefits of Energy Production and Use: Terminating slavery.

      David, why do you propose going back to a society based on slave labour?

      1. David Johnson

        Because he reckons he will be one of the slave owners.

      2. David Appell

        DirkH: I have no idea what your idea is supposed to mean.

        Climate change lasts for at least 10,000 years. Why are you willing to hold a few hundred generations to suffering the consequences of your refusal to pay for clean energy?

        1. AndyG55

          “I have no idea”

          Your life story..

          Don’t bore us with it !!!

        2. yonason

          Warmist Activists Say The Darnedest Things

          “…climate change created by burning coal lasts at least 10,000 years. – David Appell

          Have you ever considered a career in stand up comedy?

    3. Kestrel27

      Your response doesn’t seem very logical. This thread is about the expense and inefficiency of wind power. I don’t see anyone on it arguing that the use of fossil fuels has no costs for the environment or human health. But even if one accepts the climate change consensus it is now self evident in my view that wind power is a wholly inadequate substitute for fossil fuels.

      And leaving aside the expense and unreliability of wind, plastering the countryside with wind farms is environmentally destructive. I find it extraordinary that greens, who by definition consider themselves environmentally caring, support them so strongly, apparently without any regard for their destructive impact. Fortunately there are now signs that the people who are affected by wind farms and proposals for them are resisting more strongly.

      I think there will come a time sooner or later, preferably sooner, when Governments and even greens come to recognise wind power for the white elephant it is. But I’m not holding my breath.

      1. David Appell

        No one says that wind power alone, today, is a “substitute for fossil fuels.”

        But it certainly is part of it. They’d be more if Germany didn’t chicken out of using nuclear power because of a tsunami that could never happen there.

        1. AndyG55

          “But it certainly is part of it.”

          BULL S**T.

          Its a FAD, a meaningless, wasteful whim

          irregular, erratic..

          sort of like you !!

          1. yonason

            At least he got the nuclear part right.

            (must be some kind of first? good thing I was sitting down when I read that)

        2. AndyG55

          I give 10-15 years and all this renewable crap will be rusting hulks, just like most of the earlier attempts were.

          And who will be left to clean up the mess….

          the tax-payer of course…

          those who scammed the money will be long gone.

          1. AndyG55

            Because , you see… its NOT renewable..

            ….. someone has to pay to renew it. !!!

          2. yonason

            “…..someone has to pay to renew it.!!”

            And pay they will, because Once begun it can’t be halted**, and cost MUST keep pace with construction.

            Hmmm, I think we may have found the consequences of the real “tipping point,” and they are runaway insanity.

            ** quote is from Lefty propaganda rag – whose premise is sadly believed by far too many.

        3. Kestrel27

          Did you see the word ‘alone’ in my first comment? I think not. In case you weren’t wilfully misinterpreting what I meant let me spell it out. Wind power is a wholly inadequate substitute for the proportion of power generation for which it is supposed to be a substitute because it is expensive, inefficient, unreliable and environmentally destructive.

  11. Walter H. Schneider

    “The problem with that plan is that offshore wind energy is far more expensive.” That is not a problem. It is the intention. The higher the price of electric energy, the greater the tax revenues that can be collected. The greatest advantages of the scam is that for those sort of tax increases – and they are massive – governments don’t ever need legislative authorization.

    1. AndyG55

      Actually, isn’t more tax pay out for off-sea wind farms?

      The scammers get the money, from the stupid governments and the public that are forced to pay for it or FREEZE. !!

      1. yonason

        Well, if they are far enough out to sea, we can’t see them; and you know the old saying, “out of their sight, out of their mind.”

    2. yonason

      @ Walter

      As I wrote above, “Cost MUST keep pace with construction.”
      https://curryja.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/rutledge2015fig2.png

  12. U.N. refugee chief: Europe has ‘completely failed’ in migrant crisis - RiyadhVision

    […] German Consumers Paying Record Amount For Green Energy …Energiewende On "Best Path To Financial Di… […]

  13. Pethefin
  14. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #216 | Watts Up With That?