Environmental sanity prevails
Bavaria’s highest constitutional court (Verfassungsgerichtshof) has just upheld the southern German state’s hotly contested 10 H wind turbine permitting rule which has been in effect since February 2014.
The Court ruled that the requirement is indeed constitutional. Full story here.
Bavaria’s highest court rescues the state’s idyllic landscape from wind turbine industrialization. Photo: CC BY-SA 3.0 de.,
The ruling represents a major landmark victory for wind energy opponents, who have been increasingly shocked by the rampant destruction of Germany’s countryside and natural landscape. They greeted the ruling with loud cheers.
Major setback for Big Wind
The Court’s decision marks a huge setback for the German wind industry, climate protection activists, and for the Germany’s once highly touted Energiewende as a whole.
The Bavaraian Green party reacted angrily to the Court’s ruling. According to BR24 leading Green Party official Eike Hallitzky tweeted:
10H remains amok energy policy. Us Greens are going to continue fighting for climate protection. With all our might!”
Wind turbine proponents were hoping to erect up to 4000 wind turbines in Bavaria, one of the country’s most fabled and idyllic regions and home to world renowned sights such as the Neuschwanstein Castle (see above).
The Court’s ruling sends a crystal clear message to the rest of the country, and to Europe: People have had it with watching their landscape being ruined today in order to maybe theoretically protect the climate of the year 2100.
After more than 2 years of legal battling, the Bavarian high court’s ruling was awaited with uncharacteristically high suspense from both proponents and opponents of wind energy. Wind energy supporters insisted the 10 H regulation violated the law.
Over the past months wind projects across Germany have been met with increasingly fierce opposition.
Under the 10 H rule, wind parks can be installed only if they have a minimum distance that is ten times the turbine’s height away from residential homes. That means a 200-meter tall turbine needs to be at least 2 kilometers away from the nearest residential area before it can be approved.
In Bavaria that would make the construction of most wind park projects virtually impossible.
German public broadcasting SAT1 BAYERN here wrote yesterday:
The opponents are not in any way old nuclear power protesters. Among the environmentalists there is bitter discourse, as the price for clean wind energy is the total industrialization of the landscape. […] . In densely populated Germany, open views of natural scenery are becoming rare. For this reason some CSU parliamentarians in the state parliament find the love for wind parks by the Greens rather peculiar.”
Germany has some 26,000 turbines in operation producing some 85 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity annually – which is less than the country’s remaining 8 nuclear power plants. SAT1 writes that wind turbines “are also no efficient form of energy generation, as a glance at the power business shows.”
SAT1 adds that without subsidies, most turbines would not even turn a profit.
In total Germany already pays out about 25 billion euros annually in subsidies for green energy. Nevertheless CO2 emissions have not dropped in 7 years. In other words: well over 100 billion euros have bought nothing.
SAT1 concludes on wind energy in Bavaria:
Clean energy supply with today’s technology is incompatible with the landscape that took 2000 years to form.”
75 responses to “Major Blow To Wind Power …Bavaria’s Highest Court Upholds 10H Rule! Shoots Down Industrialization Of Idyllic Landscape”
It is a well-known fact that it is only the subsidies that keep the windmills turning, take away the subsidies and the windmills grind to a halt.
Also, its time to remove feed-in mandates.
Level the playing field.
I believe it was T. Boone Pickens who said something about investment in windmills make no sense without the subsidies.
Warren Buffett, I believe
Could somebody our the green lap dog politicians in Australia know this before our federal election in July.
And New Zealand, please!
Ironically, solar and wind power have not done much to reduce America’s carbon dioxide emissions. Studies show solar power is responsible for one percent of the decline in U.S. carbon-dioxide emissions, while natural gas is responsible for almost 20 percent. For every ton of carbon dioxide cut by solar power, hydraulic fracturing for natural gas cut 13 tons.
Highlights: We argue it is unlikely that RE [renewable energy] can meet existing global energy use.
The most important RE sources, wind and solar energy, are also intermittent, necessitating major energy storage as these sources increase their share of total energy supply. We show that estimates for the technical potential of RE vary by two orders of magnitude, and argue that values at the lower end of the range must be seriously considered, both because their energy return on energy invested falls, and environmental costs rise, with cumulative output. Finally, most future RE output will be electric, necessitating radical reconfiguration of existing grids to function with intermittent RE.
Two highly qualified Google engineers who have spent years studying and trying to improve renewable energy technology have stated quite bluntly that renewables will never permit the human race to cut CO2 emissions to the levels demanded by climate activists. Whatever the future holds, it is not a renewables-powered civilisation: such a thing is impossible.
I am not sure, if people understand the full consequences of this utterly stupid decision.
For a start, the Bavarian government itself has made a plan to build 1500 new wind turbines till 2021.
“Thorsten Glauber von den Freien Wählern sieht nun die Staatsregierung am Zug. “Sie muss erklären, wie sie ihr selbst gesetztes Ziel von 1500 Windrädern in Bayern bis 2021 umsetzen will.””
Good luck with that plan, now that the court has ruled out 99.9% of bavaria for building the newest turbines. even those with a focus on protecting birds are horrified by the decision, as this leaves only the most remote (and most natural!) places for building wind mills. Plain out stupid!
While celebrating the decision, you might consider a couple of other points. If Bavaria can make such a rule, banning wind 2 km from any building, what should stop other sates from banning nuclear 100 km from their buildings? How will a coal company justify digging below villages, when wind mills are banned 2 km from it? Such utter moronic inconsistencies can be upheld by close government (CSU) to court (you will struggle to find a judge who is not a CSU member in Bavaria) for some time, but not for ever.
by the way, renewables (as is predicted) provided 95% of demand on sunday.
“Der Energieverbrauch habe in Deutschland zu diesem Zeitpunkt fast 57,8 Gigawatt betragen. Knapp 95 Prozent (rund 54,8 Gigawatt) des Stromverbrauchs hätten damit die Erneuerbaren zu diesen Zeitpunkt decken können.”
But hey, keep ignoring them.
I thought you’d like that development, sod. Of course no one is keeping anyone from building the turbines in Bavaria. They just need to be kept very short. 🙂
Attaboy, sod. You tell ’em. Brave new world, and all that. Can’t for the life of me figure out why no one is listening to you and your friends.
Why would sod find this decision a problem? After all, analyses have revealed that building solar and wind plants actually increases (doubles!) CO2 emissions. For example:
Why Will Emissions Double as We Add Wind and Solar Plants? [pg. 15]
Wind and Solar require flexible backup generation. Nuclear is too inflexible to backup renewables without expensive engineering changes to the reactors. Flexible electric storage is too expensive at the moment. Consequently natural gas provides the backup for wind and solar in North America. When you add wind and solar you are actually forced to reduce nuclear generation to make room for more natural gas generation to provide flexible backup.
Ontario currently produces electricity at less than 40 grams of CO2 emissions/kWh. Wind and solar with natural gas backup produces electricity at about 200 grams of CO2 emissions/kWh. Therefore adding wind and solar to Ontario’s grid drives CO2 emissions higher.
From 2016 to 2032 as Ontario phases out nuclear capacity to make room for wind and solar, CO2 emissions will double (2013 LTEP data). In Ontario, with limited economic hydro and expensive storage, it is mathematically impossible to achieve low CO2 emissions at reasonable electricity prices without nuclear generation.
Why did you pick Ontario?
It is a very special place with a lot of very special extremely inflexible nuclear.
and their society of engineers, currently deeply involved in a huge nuclear expansion ($12 billion) prefer to back nuclear? Surprise!
But they have a huge problem: Wind power is already cheaper than the new power plants they want to build TODAY.
“Wind power is already cheaper.”
When I see you campaigning for the removal of feed-in mandates, and the removal of wind subsidies, then I will believe you believe that.
Come on sob… say it.
“Wind energy does not need subsidies and can exist without them”
I f’dare you
“But they have a huge problem: Wind power is already cheaper than the new power plants they want to build TODAY. ”
So let’s say wind turbine operators want to enter into a contract with me. I need electricity. Constantly. Not when THEY have some; but round the clock. I also need some when they can’t deliver.
So what price do you think would I want to pay for an offer that says, we will deliver electricity when and if WE decide?
I tell you what price; zero. The offer has no value to me.
In a free market, wind power electricity – or any other intermittent source – approaches a price of zero.
Wind and solar power can only be pushed on the market through the manipulation of the state.
That’s why leftists love them so much. They are purely statist products. Ironically, it totally contradicts the central planning idea of the Left to prefer products that are unplannable – but contradictions have never bothered a leftist brain.
“So let’s say wind turbine operators want to enter into a contract with me. I need electricity. Constantly. Not when THEY have some; but round the clock. I also need some when they can’t deliver.”
you do not understand the electricity market. If you want to, make a long term contradict with a coal plant.
But the majority of people will not buy from a single plant.
I am not surprised. you only like the market if it favours your position.
“I am not surprised. you only like the market if it favours your position.”
The FREE-market would never have bothered with masses of wind turbines.
Wind turbines only exist because of massive government distortion of the free-market through mandated feed-in and massive subsidies.
Take away those, and all you will have left is a whole bunch of decaying white-elephant type monuments to government stupidity.
Totally false. Either stop lying or if you are simply ignorant, do more research outside leftist green web sites.
Ontario’s fleet of CANDU reactors are extremely flexible but the generally run them at full power because it makes economic sense to do so given the negligible fuel cost and they have sufficient hydro to do the load following. But now do ramp the CANDU reactors up and down because they are now forced by unpredictable, uncontrollable (and totally unneeded) wind generators as the hydro capacity of Ontario cannot cope alone with the variation.
Of course, the total lack of correlation of wind vs demand and the sheer rate at which wind can come in and drop out means Canada has also had to increase usage of gas turbines, especially low efficiency open cycle, fast ramping turbines. So as others have stated, wind energy has increased CO2 emissions in Ontario. It has utterly failed to do anything positive except transfer wealth to wind farm operators and installers.
“Totally false. Either stop lying or if you are simply ignorant, do more research outside leftist green web sites.
Ontario’s fleet of CANDU reactors are extremely flexible but the generally run them at full power because it makes economic sense ”
My claim was a DIRECT QUOTE from the original source that started this sidetrack. How about an excuse for your stupid accusation, for once?
“Nuclear is too inflexible to backup renewables without expensive engineering changes to the reactors.”
(pdf page 15)
““Nuclear is too inflexible to backup renewables without expensive engineering changes to the reactors.”
So where did your “extremely inflexible” garbage come from, sob.?
They are flexible, just nowhere near enough to cope with the highly erratic output of wind turbines.
Now back to the part you ignored…
Come on sob… say it.
“Since wind energy is so cheap…..
Wind energy does not need subsidies and can exist without them”
I f’dare you
Nuclear is “too inflexible”???
…perhaps because all they can do is produce electricity reliably?
Shame on them!
yet another sob story about how things that work should be replaced by things that don’t. he’ll never learn.
“If Bavaria can make such a rule, banning wind 2 km from any building, what should stop other sates from banning nuclear 100 km from their buildings? How will a coal company justify digging below villages, when wind mills are banned 2 km from it? Such utter moronic inconsistencies”
Wait a moment. You want the H10 ruling to be discarded because you want to keep nuclear reactors near cities?
Also, how do you think does an open strip lignite mine dig BELOW A VILLAGE? There’s no other type of coal mining in Germany left.
BTW, you might have missed it, but the Green party CDU with their Chancellor Merkel has already closed down half the nukes so what do you complain? Let’s dismantle half the wind turbines next. They’re ugly and a giant waste of money through the subsidies.
Not that I expect *ANY* rational decision from our ruling parties.
“Also, how do you think does an open strip lignite mine dig BELOW A VILLAGE? There’s no other type of coal mining in Germany left.”
Well, the village will no longer be there, when they are finished.
Just imagine for a second, that a court in another sate supports a similar law: coal mining gets restricted to 0.1% of the state’s area, without even checking whether there is any coal on the area left (that is exactly what happened to wind power!).
and the same could easily happen to any fracking plans. Are you really sure that you fully understood this moronic decision by a Bavarian court?
PS: and while you are celebrating a minor point, a renewables peak did provid 95% of demand.
Directly after “april winter”, useless solar PV was providing 26 GW.
Here you are sob, I’ve updated the castle image to be more to you liking
That castle is a symbol for the oppressive white patriarchy anyway.
You have to admit that the wind turbines are a VAST improvement, though. !! 😉
“a renewables peak did provide 95% of demand. ”
WOW, for about 5 minutes. !!
You still don’t see that this is exactly the problem with “in-consistent un-reliables”, do you.
And just look at this:
It’s AMAZING! If he hadn’t been so TOTALLY WRONG, he could actually have been right. OK, maybe not even close, but HEY…! Ho..! hum.
Whatever he’s smoking, it’s got him hooked bad.
Did this calculation for the UK once for a 1 month period.
Calculate the percentage of nameplate capacity that wind turbines can GUARANTEE to delivery 95% of the time.
Answer was around 2% to 4% of nameplate.
For solar, it is ZERO PERCENT
For coal, gas, nuclear etc etc it is well over 85%
I read somewhere that there was one middled aged nuclear plant that over a whole year, delivered 104% of its nameplate.
Its all about RELIABILITY OF SUPPLY.
And wind and solar just CAN NOT give this.
Next.. the 20H plan 🙂
HooRah. It is high time somebody showed some sense about the wind turbine fiasco. There is simply no place in enlightened society for wind turbines unless you want an unenLIGHTened society.
Would somebody please send this message to our Premier Wynne and our Prime Minister Trudeau. We here in Ontario, Canada are tired of their ignorance on such a issue. These wind turbines are making people sick, cost of power is the highest in our Country not to mention the sound pollution and sight pollution.
It’s the voters you need to reach. Wynne and Trudeau, like Obama and Hillary, are ideologues who won’t change. No matter how much information you give them, no matte how many people get sick, no matter how useless a project is (often the more useless the better for them), they could care less. Wishing you well in surviving them, and maybe getting someone who knows what he/she is doing when they are done.
Ontario has one choice to stop energy insanity, àrrest and charge Wynne and Dalton, if Ontario had a legitimate police force (OPP = Caledonia ), it would have happened years ago. I think one issue is handcuffs, finding them big enough for her and small enough for him.
Bravo Margaret Seed. Well said.
As Germany has shown, even the best engineers cannot produce enough power from wind turbines to offset the resources required to build and maintain them. That’s why they need mandates and subsidies to survive. When you add landscape blight and bird/bat slaughter to their resume, it’s clear that wind turbine power generation is a bad idea.
Wind power has become incredibly cheap. Even Republicans in the USA are starting to understand this, and so the CSU will also notice one day:
Wind and Solar have become so cheap that the German ratepayer will be forced to hand over 31 billion Euros in subsidies in 2016, up from 28 billion Euro in 2015.
Now I grant you that this giant theft is hidden so well by the Leftist media and state media (which steal another 8 billion from the Germans in a year for propagandist dreck); that many Germans to this day don’t even know.
Leftism: Advances by deception and outright lies, as we see here from sod. (you said “incredibly cheap”. Correct is: Outrageously expensive AND useless, nay, make that harmful, to the grid. And birds. And humans.)
a) SJW’s ALWAYS lie.
b) SJW’s always double down.
c) SJW’s always project.
In Australia, wind farms cost more to operate than a coal plant!
The funniest thing about wind-power is that when the wind speed really gets going — when there is serious power — the turbines have to be shut down.
“… the price for clean wind energy is the total industrialization of the landscape.” – Pierre quoting SAT1 BAYERN
Ya don’t say!
Egregious deception. Wind power costs do not include cost of mandatory fossil fuel backup power for when the wind does not blow hard enough.
Congratulations Dirk and company:
Way to go. I knew the Germans would come through regarding renewable energy, and show the way for the rest of the world…:)
Great job guys….
Yeah, did heaps good…
Must be time to turn off all those COAL and GAS fired power stations that are doing MOST of the energy providing.
“Must be time to turn off all those COAL and GAS fired power stations that are doing MOST of the energy providing.”
you are wrong again. a single look at the graph will show you, that wind was ….[-snip surely you can do better than “thinkprogress” as an objective source. NTZ is not a platform for propaganda outlets and disinformation regurgitators. PG]
why did you snip this link?
i was just repeating the link that started this chain of discussion. (the link was from Buddy above)
i could link to the original AGORA source, but that would be mostly confusing.
Wind was either following demand by chance on that day or it was curtailed massively.
That is a fact and that has nothing to do with the source of the picture!
“why did you snip this link?….the link was from Buddy above”
diddums. need a tissue?
It is expected from buddy.. propaganda pap.
You, at least, should know better, because you are such an expert and would never stoop to such low levels ;-).
“a single look at the graph will show you”
Yes, the single graph I linked to, shows that COAL and GAS fired power stations that are doing MOST of the energy providing.
Real data was never your friend, was it.
Tell me sob, what percentage of nameplate can the German wind farms guarantee to provide 95% of the time? (Use hourly or less data over a 2-3 month period.)
You have a homework assignment to do, to show us just how good wind turbines are.
@AndyG55 10. May 2016 at 10:00 PM
Buddy is deliberately obnoxious and grating, sod often comes across as sincere. But while there’s a certain sadness in sod’s dedication to a falsehood he believes in so deeply, he does occasionally illuminate an issue. But, again sadly, he just never sees that light. Maybe some day he’ll get it…
Obviously, they can also remove the feed-in mandates and subsidies on wind and solar, and they will continue to do “real good”.
The ONLY thing holding renewables together are those massive market bending subsidies, and EVERY German is paying for that.
From your article, Buddy
– “for a brief, shining moment, renewable power output in Germany reached 90 percent of the country’s total electricity demand”
– “Sunday’s spike resulted from a combination of reduced demand — a Sunday morning lull in power consumption”
You have an amazingly blinkered and unscientific attitude Buddy 10
Buddy 10. May 2016 at 2:21 AM | Permalink | Reply
“Congratulations Dirk and company:”
Well thinkprogress; a good name for MAGICAL THINKING.
You American progressives are really stupid. You constantly confuse energy needs with electricity.
Hey I’ll give you some homework, stupid. Find out what the proportion of electricity to total energy consumption is.
Then find out what the VALUE of the electricity is and what the amount of SUBSIDIES is; I gave you the number.
You American progressives should have learned from the catastrophy that was New Harmony. Never heard of it? Look it up. It was the second collapse of American Progressivism. The first one was the Mayflower of course.
At least the survivors of the Mayflower LEARNED something from it.
Hey at least buddy’s MAGICALTHINK website shows that hard coal , without any subsidies, generated 66% of the electricity output of the entire subsidized universe of solar and wind – reliably, silently, extremely efficient (because what they omitted is that hard coal ALSO generates heat for district heating for hundreds of thousands of households).
All of this with coal that is simply imported from Australia, USA or Russia. Because none of it is mined in Germany.
THAT’s what keeps the country alive and ENABLES the huge waste of solar and wind.
So Buddy, get your progressive superbrain in action and tell me, what part of energy consumption is electricity.
CSU i changing course and starts to abandon target of 1500 wind turbines.
There is the idea of a price zone split between north and south (and even more with Austria), which would lead to higher electricity prices in the south.
“which would lead to higher electricity prices in the south”
and the poor suffer yet again…
I assume this is your desire, hey sob.
Those who can afford the niche luxury of higher prices due to inefficient unreliables.. no problem
the rest… can eat dirt.
“CSU i changing course and starts to abandon target of 1500 wind turbines. ”
The idiot political caste will abandon many targets. Get used to it.
The rebound from the El Nino and the wonky northern jet stream is already starting to HURT.
Food crops like WARM.. not COLD
What type of people want to go back to Little Ice Age conditions and at the same time make energy erratic and inconsistent, and prices skyrocket and make it more difficult for people to heat their homes?
Very sick minded, evil people.
again, i love your opinions, but you will have to face the facts.
wind is the cheapest source of electricity in the US, even without subsidies:
“Wind now ranks as the lowest-cost option for generating electricity, even before federal green-energy tax incentives are factored in.”
the same is happening with solar PV in India:
“”I think a new coal plant would give you costlier power than a solar plant,” India’s energy minister, Piyush Goyal, said in January. An auction that month showcased a record low price for solar energy capacity, which will be key to the calculus India uses to decide how much more coal to burn. Investors appear to be taking the hint, as more and more drop coal and look into solar.”
[-snip sorry, but site is disinformation outlet -PG]
And while people here consider it necessary for wind turbines to keep a 2 km distance from a village, unless there is total consent, the UK forgot to ask its neighbours about the Hinkley nuclear disaster in making:
Readers should note that sod constantly cites alarmists sites and sources, and so seems incapable of taking objective sources.
“Wind now ranks as the lowest-cost option for generating electricity, even before federal green-energy tax incentives are factored in.”
Isn’t it funny how leftists constantly try to sell super cheap solutions that make everything more expensive.
What’s wrong with your brain?
“the same is happening with solar PV in India:”
He went there himself to see it in person
I understand they had to keep chasing him and his friends away.
“wind is the cheapest source of electricity in the US, even without subsidies”
When I see you campaigning for ZERO SUBSIDIES and no feed-in mandates.. to provide this “cheap” electricity to the people… I will believe that you really believe that claptrap.
But you KNOW that renewables CANNOT exist without those subsidies, don’t you.
Removing subsidies and mandates would see the immediate collapse of the wind and solar sheltered industries.
I love this site Peter, but I think you are very wrong in attacking the credibility of the sites/articles that SOD and Buddy link to. If you are going to dispute the links, rightly so – but wrong to delete them, you should do so on the material contacted in those links. Making a blanket attack of a web site to ignore those links because where it is posted is the same exact tactics “they” use.
Now we know, if we did down in those Think Progress links, we will find the info contained in them to be TOTAL CRAP!!!
More bad news for wind. Turbines turning out to be real lemons. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2254901/Wind-turbines-half-long-previously-thought-study-shows-signs-wearing-just-12-years.html
“More bad news for wind. Turbines turning out to be real lemons. ”
that article is from 2012. As it claims that wind turbines only last 12 years and 4 more years have passed, we should have basically seen a total collapse of the industry.
How, when it is constantly attached to the life support of 31 billion Euros subsidy a year in Germany alone?
It is a giant fraud and the fraud grows with 10% a year.
“What type of people want to go back …”
They are a major splinter group of the Luddites that emerged in the 20th century schism. Modern civilization remains the Devil’s work for both branches but Soddite sinners can repent by worshiping the Wind Wheel.
Soddites have been excommunicated by Orthodox Luddites living in caves, swamps and woods without the Devil’s Tar and Spark. The Soddites have left the swamps and streamed into unbeliever territories. They must atone five times a day for their use of the Devil’s wicked handiwork by affirming their devotion to the Wheel. Blasphemy and defamation of the Wheel only strengthen the Soddites’ zeal and hatred of the unbelievers.
The ascending Soddites respond by erecting more Wheels around unbeliever communities, soaking the ground in the blood of ritual slaughter. The conquering Wheel must be visible in all directions of a settlement and its call to prayer audible in every place within.
Please watch the data these days. Germany might break another alternative power record. Also note, how close solar PV is aligned with daily peak demand these days.
The last one was on the 8. of may, with about 90% renewables compared to demand.
While you have been celebrating a minor anti-wind victory, the real world of pain is approaching coal power, which is simply put out of business, as it was in the UK last week. Coal: 0%.
“Germany might break another alternative power record”
…. for 10 seconds.
Yes Dark times in the UK when coal and other fossil fuels are forced out by the massive subsidies on non-energy systems.
I will be chuckling when the first really major crash in supply happens.
They get what they deserve.
“I will be chuckling when the first really major crash in supply happens. ”
Please hold your breath!
Remember Japan after Fukushima:
53 nuclear plants dropped out of service within a very short time. The majority is still not working.
In a very clever move., activists decided to use this weekend for a massive protest against brown coal.
Vattenfall will have huge difficulties arguing in court for the necessity to keep “schwarze pumpe” (the name!) running, when coal power is basically not needed today.
the czech company that “bought” that brown coal and plants for a negative sum (!!!) of billions of euro is also in for a lot of trouble.