German Green Energy Debacle: “Self Deception”…Dependence On Coal “Cemented For Years To Come”!

Germany used to be regarded as a global leader in the transition to renewable green energies — especially wind and solar power — a project dubbed the “Energiewende”. But this is no longer the case. Germany has fallen behind to the rear of the pack.

Ironically the USA is leading the world in cutting back CO2!

Germany’s “self-deception”

The Düsseldorf-based daily Rheinische Post (RP) here writes that it’s time for Germany to “face inconvenient truths” concerning green energies and that pragmatic (and not ideological) action is needed.

The title of the commentary: “Self-deception in the green energy transition

Green, cult-like dream now colliding with harsh reality

For years the German government, activists and alarmist scientists promised that green energies — foremost wind and sun — would be plentiful, cheap and clean. “Hooray!” the entire exclaimed in jubilation.

But today in its commentary the RP concedes that “the reality looks totally different” and that it is requiring “an enormous effort” just to keep the power grids stable as waves of unpredictable green power repeatedly surge into the power grid.

According to the RP, emergency power grid interventions by grid operators cost electricity consumers last year 1,4 billion euros. German households consequently pay 47% more for their power than the average EU.

Energiewende: “risky, inefficient and expensive”

And so what have German consumers gotten in return in terms of climate and CO2 emissions for all the extra pain? Nothing.

German CO2 emissions have stagnated (i.e. haven’t fallen at all). And according to the RP: “The German transition to green energy is in reality risky, inefficient and expensive.”

Energiewende “derailed”

The RP comments that highly ballyhooed headlines of new record amounts of green energy being produced don’t change a thing with respect to the failing green energy transition, and notes that although green energies made up 37% of the gross share of gross power consumption, these clean energies amounted only to a measly 13 percent of the entire German energy mix!

The RP asks: “How could the German flagship project have derailed in this way?”

German dependence on coal “cemented for years to come”

The main reason for the failure, the RP writes, was Germany’s panicked rush to exit nuclear power in the wake Japan’s Fukushima nuclear disaster amid a deeply-rooted, collective and decades-old German aversion to nuclear power. This lead to the German government shutting down half of its nuclear power plants overnight and diving blindly into a rapid, unplanned expansion of wind and solar power.

The decision, the RP writes, was driven by the aim to shut down nuclear power, and not to reduce CO2.

The result, the RP comments: “Unfortunately, both goals are in direct contradiction. The politically desired phase-out of nuclear power has cemented our [German] dependence on coal for years to come. Its share is still 42 percent.”

The RP then comments that if Germany were really serious about reducing CO2, the country would not shut down its remaining nuclear power plants, which produce no “greenhouse” gas emissions.

Green energies “a naive illusion”

The RP also writes Germany should reconsider its efforts “to demonize diesel engines”, which have considerably higher fuel efficiency than gasoline engines. The move to eliminate diesel engines will make CO2 reductions more difficult. The RP also notes that electric cars “are no alternative” in terms of CO2.

100% renewables “a naive illusion”

The RP calls the idea of covering all Germany’s energy needs through renewable energy “a naive illusion” and expects that the country will have to accept the fact that it will remain dependent on fossil fuels also over the long-term.

Also the collectively naive Germans in general need to get realistic and serious about what going 100% green entails. The RP comments:

Anyone who has solar cells mounted on the roof and then flies mindlessly to vacation on the Maldives, has not understood the problem.”

Public also opposes CCS

The RP finally comments on other possible technical solutions that could be employed to make the pain of having to go without fossil energies bearable, namely subsidizing CCS technology. However, a great number of Germans oppose that technology as well.

The way things are going, the RP suggests, Germany will never be able to meet its CO2 reductions targets.

10 responses to “German Green Energy Debacle: “Self Deception”…Dependence On Coal “Cemented For Years To Come”!”

  1. John F. Hultquist

    Japan’s Fukushima nuclear event was a direct result of poor construction planning on their part and a seismic sea wave {tsunami} that, while of low probability, should have been considered at that site.
    The German response to this was stupendously stupid.
    {from SciAm} “. . . the ocean bed moved as much as 50 meters laterally and 16 meters vertically. The magnitude 9.0 quake occurred close to the nearby Japan Trench that runs north to south in the Pacific Ocean . . .”

    Such a thing cannot happen in Germany.
    The German response to this should have been a quick look at each of its power sources to see if safety might be improved. For example, the Fukushima buildings allowed a build-up of Hydrogen that caused additional damage upon explosion. There is more, but most is well known now.
    My uneducated German grandparents were a whole lot smarter than the current politicians of Germany.

    1. SebastianH

      Such a thing cannot happen in Germany.
      The German response to this should have been […]

      Germany didn’t spontanously decide to phase out nuclear power. The decision to do that was made long before Fukushima, but the timeline was extended by the government before Fukushima and the event made them revert this extension.

      My uneducated German grandparents were a whole lot smarter than the current politicians of Germany.

      So your grandparents didn’t realize just how expensive nuclear power is in the end and you call that being smarter?

  2. Bitter&twisted

    Green “energy” is a regressive taxation scam. Robbing the poor to fund the rich.
    It cannot compete without subsidies, has zero effect on CO2 emissions, destabilises distribution grids and kills bats and birds.
    Eventually the public wake up to the scam- look what happened in Australia.


    1. SebastianH

      It cannot compete without subsidies

      Sure it can, troll. Get rid of the subsidies for fossil and nuclear power and you’ll see.

      has zero effect on CO2 emissions


      destabilises distribution grids

      Sure? Don’t have rolling blackouts in Germany and we don’t see those in countries with far more renewables on the grid. As long as “slow” conventional power plants are enough to compensate variations in renewable electricity production, it can’t be that serious.

      and kills bats and birds.

      Yeah and cause the dreaded wind turbine syndrome! Don’t ever forget that!

      Eventually the public wake up to the scam- look what happened in Australia.

      What happened in Australia? I just hope the public can identify the nonsense guys like you are spreading as what it is. This “zero effect on CO2 emissions” phrase seems to be particular sticky even though it is purely fiction made up by … well … guys like you. I wonder why you keep doing that.

      1. spike55

        Another EVIDENCE -FREE post from the mindless trollette.

        DENIAL of basic physics of grid destabilisation.

        DENIAL of the scientifically effects of infrasound

        DENIAL of the avian massacres

        DENIAL that the unreliables need 100% back-up

        DENIAL that they wouldn’t exist without massive subsidies.
        (Hear the squealing of pigs at the trough whenever those subsidies are reduced)

        The public is starting to identify the LIES and the BS coming from the AGW agenda. That is why pawns like you are in such a panic.

        The fact that you are total unable to answer basic questions about your baseless religion, shows everybody just how deficit it really is.

        Your DESPERATION is palpable, seb.. and so hilarious. 🙂

        Q1. In what way has the climate changed in the last 40 years, that can be scientifically attributable to human CO2 ?

        Q2. Do you have ANY EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE at all that humans have changed the global climate in ANYWAY WHATSOEVER?

        1. SebastianH

          Another EVIDENCE -FREE post from the mindless trollette.

          If you are so averse to comments containing no “evidence”, why do you keep posting them yourself?

          The public is starting to identify the LIES and the BS coming from the AGW agenda. That is why pawns like you are in such a panic.

          What are you even talking about? Outside your ignorant bubble nobody cares about the conspiracies (sorry Kenneth) you are trying to “expose”. And neither is anyone in panic. I am calmly trying to withstand your troll attempts and numerous insults to me personally and intelligence in general.

          The fact that you are total unable to […]

          Ehm, you are unable to understand basic math and that’s a fact. You’ve shown this many times now. Repeating those questions while completely ignoring that they’ve been answered multiple times not only by me, but by climate science in general (go, use a search engine to break out of your bubble), doesn’t make your position stronger. It only cements the clown act you are trying to pull off here.

          Have a nice day and don’t get too angry and hateful.

      2. David Guy-Johnson

        Sebastian’s posts seem to get ever more frantic and deranged. The strain of denying reality must really be starting to tell.

  3. Doug Proctor

    The full version comments that Norway wants Europe’s CO2 for injection/storage.


    Like the oft-touted Canadian injection project (I wirked on the fields), this is an enhanced oil recovery project, with CO2 cycling. The object is to increase recovery if oil – subsidized by othet people.

    I love reality.

  4. Mikky

    “Green” electricity is not even snake oil, which was offered to people with genuine ailments, and the offer could be declined. “Green” electricity is forced on people, and is an expensive solution in search of a problem.

    1. Yonason


      I’m glad I perused the comments before leaving again for a while, otherwise I might have missed your very astute remarks. You’ve nailed it.

Leave a Reply

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