Germany’s CO2 Reduction Targets Cast Into “Serious Jeopardy” As Country Overhauls Policies

The English language version of public broadcaster Deutsche Welle (DW) reports the latest on the unavoidable and what many critics are calling as long overdue reforms of Germany’s renewable energies feed in act (EEG) as the country reels from extremely high costs and daunting technical challenges.

Winbd sun May 2016

Pulling the reins on Germany’s wildly fluctuating sun and wind energies. Wind and solar production in Germany, May, 2016: Chart: Agora.

Spiraling prices, daunting technical challenges

Germany’s mad rush into renewable energies has led to huge spiraling electricity price increases and left power grid operators struggling to keep the wildly fluctuating system form crashing.

As the situation became increasingly precarious, the government was forced to admit that reforms were necessary to keep the situation from spiraling out of control, and thus recently agreed on a major reform of subsidies for renewable energies.

Experts say the new measure will result in a comprehensives scale-back in new renewable energy installations, thus putting the brakes on the green electricity scheme. The DW writes:

The new rules amount to a major reform of the Renewable Energy Law of 2000 (EEG in German)”.

So far Germany has committed hundreds of billions of euros in renewable electricity. Yet even today electricity from renewable sources barely represents a tiny fraction of Germany’s total primary energy needs, casting into question of whether it makes any sense. The overall theoretical impact on global temperature will be only a few hundredths of a degree Celsius by the year 2100.

Days of guraranted profits for operators are over

The new rules means an end to the government-mandated prices, and more free-market pricing., the DW writes. The German government is scrapping the existing system of long-term guaranteed tariffs for green energy producers and that beginning in January 2017 “it will operate competitive bidding systems in which the right to develop a particular wind or solar project will go to whichever credible bidder agrees to accept the lowest revenue per kWh on a 20-year contract.”

The government also will limit the installation of new wind farms. Last year alone grid operators had to pay a billion euros for wind power capacity that went unused, the DW reports.

Germany’s CO2 reduction targets in “serious jeopardy”

This new rule has led to howls from the wind energy industry and its backers, who say that nuclear and fossil fuel generated electricity utilities are to blame for the grid fluctuation problems. Moreover green energy proponents claim that the new rules put Germany’s climate  targets for rapid reductions in carbon dioxide emissions “into serious jeopardy“.

Read DW report here.

 

47 responses to “Germany’s CO2 Reduction Targets Cast Into “Serious Jeopardy” As Country Overhauls Policies”

  1. Harry Dale Huffman

    The politicians are still not acting responsibly. What they need to do is snap out of their “global warming”/”climate change” delusion altogether. There is no valid climate science, so there can be no rational climate policy–or energy policy linked to climate–now.

  2. Graeme No.3

    The comment from the Green sums up the problem:
    “Transmission grid problems could be defused if big coal- and gas-fired power generators reacted flexibly to temporary overcapacity,” which can occur on windy or sunny days, “or if [coal] disappeared from the market altogether,”

    Obviously he has no idea about electricity generation and thinks it is like water where you can turn a tap on and off. And he can’t read a pie chart either, as it shows wind and solar increasing but coal fired only decreasing 1%; it is the lower emission but more expensive methods that are being pushed out of the market.
    Good luck to the Government trying to get him to see sense.

    1. Analitik

      But Graeme, the article specifically states he’s their energy expert so he must know more about electricity systems than other Greens.

      Hmm…

  3. DirkH

    SPD and CDU are totally panicking as their voters disappear. They would *LOVE* to amp up the theft even more but it just can’t be pushed through even with the most expensive propaganda broadcasters in the world (ARD and ZDF, 8 bn EUR a year). (For comparison: the renewables subsidies cost 31 bn EUR a year and have been growing exponentially with 15% a year.)
    So suddenly they find a solution. Filthy thieves.

  4. Graeme No.3

    Pierre:
    O/T but couldn’t get it to post elsewhere.
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/the-times/bad-cholesterol-helps-you-live-longer/news-story/9341cf5325f64c0f22573b388806fd24
    but I am sure it will be in other newspapers e.g. The Times.
    “What we found in our detailed systematic review was that older people with high LDL levels — the so-called ‘bad’ cholesterol — lived longer and had less heart disease. Many of us suspected this may be true but the consistency of the results was astonishing. The diet/heart cholesterol hypothesis has been called the greatest scam in the history of medicine. It seems that is right.”

    The researchers analysed 19 international studies involving 68,094 elderly people and found that in 92 per cent of cases LDL cholesterol — low-density lipoprotein, or bad cholesterol — did not increase the chance of death caused by heart disease.

    They also found that people with high levels of LDL cholesterol were less likely to die prematurely from other diseases, such as cancer.

    The results, published in the journal BMJ Open, are the latest from a series of studies that undermine accepted theories involving diet and health.

  5. cementafriend

    The simplest strategy to achieve lower energy prices is a) stop all subsidies to any producer b) have a competitive energy market controlled by an independent regulator which could be overseen by government c) have each producer/supplier bid forward by 3hrs under a legal contract for fifteen minute blocks of electricity supply d) if a supplier falls short of their contract they get fined the same monetary value as the contract. Unreliable suppliers such as wind and solar will have problems of meeting contracts and without subsidies they will be more expensive than the base load producers. It is likely that Nuclear from France and Coal fired from Poland will be competitive in Germany

  6. Stephen Richards

    So the german windmill companies are now creeping out of Germany and across the rest of Europe to increase their filthy gains. They are putting up 5x 287 metres turbines near us in the forests. All the animals are protected but sod it they dont matter and there are few voters.

  7. Arsten

    From the article:
    “So far Germany has committed hundreds of billions of euros in renewable electricity. Yet even today electricity from renewable sources barely represents a tiny fraction of Germany’s total primary energy needs, casting into question of whether it makes any sense.”
    ….
    “Vice Chancellor Gabriel disagreed, saying: “We will only achieve these [climate] targets if we make as strong progress in [decarbonizing] other fields, including heating and transportation, as we have made at building capacity in renewable electricity generation.””

    So….huge government expense for little to no benefit? How….great for Germany?

    1. DirkH

      Government expense? What is that? See, governments exist to make a profit for the party members. Citizen expense, my dear friend.

  8. sod

    The graph is horribly misleading.

    just check for yourself: toggle to 31 days and switch of conventionals.

    https://www.agora-energiewende.de/de/themen/-agothem-/Produkt/produkt/76/Agorameter/

    The graph is erasing 5 GW of biomass and 3.5 GW of hydro.

    It is also ignoring the demand curve, which basically follows the PV solar peaks.

    1. DirkH

      “It is also ignoring the demand curve, which basically follows the PV solar peaks.”

      With “basically”, do you mean “sometimes”? Or “when the sun is shining”?

      1. sod

        “With “basically”, do you mean “sometimes”? Or “when the sun is shining”?”

        Just look at the curve.

        https://www.agora-energiewende.de/de/themen/-agothem-/Produkt/produkt/76/Agorameter/

        You do know how to click on a link, do you?

        1. DirkH

          Sod, you are blessed with the bird of a brain. How does solar follow a consumption pattern WHEN THE SKY IS CLOUDY.

          The Greens have found a True Believer in you. You’ll believe ANYTHING.

  9. Dan Pangburn

    The fixation on CO2 level needs to be put in context: Bar chart presents graphic emphasis in Figure 5 at http://globalclimatedrivers.blogspot.com

    Carbon dioxide levels, ppmv
    40,000 Exhaled breath
    20,000 OK in submarines
    8,000 OSHA limit for 8 hr exposure
    5,000 OSHA limit for continuous exposure
    5,000 Approximate level 500 million years ago
    1,500 Artificial increase in some greenhouses to enhance plant growth
    1,000 Approximate level 100 million years ago
    1,000 Common target maximum for ventilation design for buildings
    404 Current atmospheric level
    275 Atmospheric level before industrial revolution
    190 Atmospheric level at end of last glaciation
    150 All plants and animals die below this level.

    1. DirkH

      “150 All plants and animals die below this level.”

      C3 plants stop photosynthesizing below this level, that much is true, and given the condition persists, obviously die eventually.
      Why an animal should be affected is unknown to me.
      C4 plants – grasses incl. bamboo, maize, – are slightly less efficient than C3 plants (trees), but can photosynthesize right down to 0 ppm CO2.

      1. Dan Pangburn

        The animals die of starvation.

        What do plants photosynthesize with at 0 ppm CO2?

        1. DirkH

          You said all of them die at 150 ppm. No they don’t. C4 goes on to zero. That’s all I’m saying.

          1. Dan Pangburn

            And I don’t find that you are wrong but this might be one of those distinction without a difference things. There is very little research interest in this area but some have discovered that reproductive ability becomes iffy below 150 ppmv and no one has demonstrated that fecundity would be enough to avoid extinction. But then, who cares?

      2. Tom Yoke

        “photosynthesize down to 0ppm”.
        This is a perfect gibberish statement. Do you have ANY notion of what photosynthesis means?

        Photosynthesis can be understood as the following chemical equation:
        CO2 + H2O + sunlight -> CH2O + O2
        Do you see a problem here with 0ppm CO2 levels?

        It is true that C4 plants, which make up 5% of plant species, are able to survive at lower CO2 levels than C3 types, but the difference is a modest one. C4 plants also benefit from elevated CO2 levels, just not as much. They also suffer from low CO2 levels, just not as much.

    2. AndyG55

      A friend of mine did some experiments in CO2 greenhouses.

      He could never get the CO2 level to drop below about 220ppm.

      That is when the plants stopped trying to access it.

      1. DirkH

        He should retry with corn.

        1. AndyG55

          “He should retry with corn.”

          That is sob’s job !! 😉

  10. sod

    Look at the facts. Bloomberg has a nice video. Coal is in free fall, gas will not replace it.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-13/we-ve-almost-reached-peak-fossil-fuels-for-electricity

    1. AndyG55

      You say… look at the facts..

      then cite Bloomberg

      ROFLMAO !!!!!

      world coal and gas from BP Energy review.

      No “free fall”, just a brief lull because renewables are destroying major economies.

      http://s19.postimg.org/vx99i4l9v/coal_and_gas_world.png

      1. AndyG55

        Once this anti-CO2 farce is destroyed by common sense, coal and gas will again continue to climb, as the world’s economies get back into a “progress” mode, rather than the “regressive green agenda” mode that you so badly propagandise.

      2. sod
        1. AndyG55

          You would believe anything the Green scammers told you, wouldn’t you.

          Its NOTHING to do with wanting to be “Green” or reducing carbon footprint.

          Do some research on the REAL reason before you come sprouting your NONSENSE again, you moronic putz. !!

          1. yonason

            “Its NOTHING to do with wanting to be “Green” or reducing carbon footprint.” – AndyG55

            I found the correct answer in under a minute, but decided I’ll leave it to you to pick the appropriate time to reveal it.

            In the mean time, let him eat mizu shingen mochi.

            (actually, judging by its description, I better make enough for all of us.)

        2. AndyG55

          With these mine TEMPORARILY shut down, this will be very good for countries like Indonesia and Australia, and the price of coal in general. 🙂

          India will still need and want coal, there is NO OTHER WAY they can get adequate electricity, and it will be a while before they can overcome the mess they have created for themselves.

          1. sod
          2. DirkH
          3. AndyG55

            so, you didn’t look anywhere except your green propaganda sites.

            No wonder you are so ignorant about everything

          4. yonason

            “roflmao..

            So India is going to produce coal, WITHOUT burning it for electricity.” – AndyG55 15. June 2016 at 11:10 AM

            Yeah, They’ve discovered “Coal Fusion.”

            (quickly ducks and runs for cover)

        3. AndyG55

          The facts

          India has 446 PLANNED coal fired power stations.

          And you make a hoorah about 4 of them not going ahead… DOH !!!

          http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Power-stations-e1450707613693.png

          Don’t worry , little poppette, with the massive expansion in coal fired power over the next decades, there will be plenty of CO2 for ALL plant life.

        4. AndyG55

          http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Power-stations-e1450707613693.png

          446 planned…and you are making a hoorah about 4 not proceeding.

          So funny. 🙂

        5. AndyG55

          446 planned, and you are making a fuss about 4 being cancelled.

          So Funny.
          http://s19.postimg.org/6ot1275pv/Power_stations_e1450707613693.png

          Don’t worry, there will be plenty of CO2 for all plant life for a long long time to come.

          1. sod

            you do know the difference between a coal plant and a coal power station?

          2. AndyG55

            roflmao..

            So India is going to produce coal, WITHOUT burning it for electricity.

            You are seriously a funny little s.o.b. !

          3. yonason

            “you do know the difference between a coal plant and a coal power station?” – sod 15. June 2016 at 7:20 AM

            The world according to sod. Seeing differences where there are none, but not seeing them when he should.

            No, sod, a fly swatter and a hammer are NOT interchangeable.

            And he wonders why we don’t take him seriously.

          4. DirkH

            sod 15. June 2016 at 7:20 AM | Permalink
            “you do know the difference between a coal plant and a coal power station?”

            Wait. That’sa trick question, right? A coal plant has chimneys, cooler towers, turbines, burners.
            https://www.google.de/search?q=coal+plant&biw=1025&bih=491&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjInKaS0arNAhWIyRQKHV_SB7sQsAQIHg
            A coal power station looks exactly the same.
            https://www.google.de/search?q=coal+plant&biw=1025&bih=491&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjInKaS0arNAhWIyRQKHV_SB7sQsAQIHg#tbm=isch&q=coal+power+station
            Beats me. I give up. What’s the difference?

          5. sod

            i am sorry, obviously you are right and both words can refer to the same thing.

            so how many GW do those 500 planned power stations have?

            the 4 power plants that will not be build have 16 GW.

          6. Analitik

            According to this page, in December 2015, India had 554 coal plant projects totalling 617 GW. You may find the map at the top of the page rather upsetting, sod.

            http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Proposed_coal_plants_in_India

          7. sod

            “According to this page, in December 2015, India had 554 coal plant projects totalling 617 GW.”

            It is rather obvious, that this source is talking about blocks. (about 1 Gw each).

            It is also obvious, that the 4 plants with 16 GW are plants with multiple blocks.

        6. AndyG55
  11. AndyG55

    446 planned, and you are making a fuss about 4 being cancelled.

    So Funny. 🙂

    http://s19.postimg.org/6ot1275pv/Power_stations_e1450707613693.png

  12. Kill

    I have been browsing on-line greater than three hours these days, yet I never found any interesting article
    like yours. It’s pretty worth enough for me. In my view,
    if all site owners and bloggers made good content as you probably did, the net
    shall be much more helpful than ever before.