Yes, thank you for your normal contribution. It’s your thread Snowboarder Bo…do you have anything resembling facts to base your hope on that will reduce emissions AND meet their power needs? Geothermal? Here are the Wiki figures for 2009:
Your cite says that geothermal in Germany (which, I presume you had some point in posting a drive by link with a :rolleyes: for) was:
Do you have any more recent data on how that’s going for them? What do they have geothermal up to in the 7 years since? 1%? 4%? Is that what you are basing your ‘hope’ on, or was there some other point in your drive by link?
[QUOTE=Simplicio]
Their renewable power generation now is about equal to a third of their nuclear generation, and thats been built up in a fairly short period, so its not totally crazy that they could more or less replace nuclear with renewables over the next decade
[/QUOTE]
‘Renewables’ can mean a lot of things. Do you have any details? The Wiki link I cited earlier says that hyrdo and wind account for 1.5% of their energy in 2009 (and I’d be surprised if solar is very high), and unless they have gotten Bo’s geothermal up a lot higher than I’d expect, my guess is ‘renewable’ means some sort of bio-fueled energy.
Did you read anything in the quote box? You couldn’t have read even half of it, or you’d have noticed this:
I helpfully bolded and underlined the parts you should take particular note of. It’s funny that you thought you were being clever and mocking with your use of the trite phrase “magic pony”, but then it turns out that Germany already has one, and you didn’t even know it.
ETA: Chew on this, xtisme. (Hint: it’s more stuff you don’t know anything about. I’m fighting your ignorance.)
The point is: it can be done. It’s not a “magic pony” wishful thing that can only happen in hippie dreams, as xtisme and people like him try and convince the world, any more than putting a man on the moon was back in the 1960s (thanks Adrian).
I don’t think this will break Germany economically, but I do think it’ll effect their emissions profile for the worse in the short term. In the longer term, I think they’re quite capable of showing that renewables can be a viable national power source. And I say this as someone who has no problem with nuclear power.
Anything is possible if you throw enough money at it. That doesn’t make it practical. All they’re going to do is make themselves less competitive while building a 25 year land mine that blows up in the face of the next generation. All those solar cells lining the autobahn will have to be replaced and they will either have to use Chinese built units to save money or just suck it up and pay the production based on their own higher costs.
I predict that Germany will wind up buying a lot of nuclear-produced electricity-from France.
Solar and wind won’t do the job-wind is subject to grid-unbalancing fluctuations, and solar doesn’t work at night.
The high cost of electricity will drive industry out of Germany-which is a trend happening now (the ageing German population is also driving it).
I don’t think it will have that much impact on Germany, as the French will just build more nuclear plants, and sell the power to the Germans. As long as the Germans can produce other things that the French will want to buy, things will work out for them.
China and India have skyrocketing demands for electricity (stats on China). China is aggressively pursuing nuclear technologies.
The US forecasts a need for more electric consumption in the future too. This will be especially true if we switch to electric cars (which by 2030 or so we will have to). Add all those cars to the grid and electric needs will spike dramatically.
If you look at the PDF they cite you see a solid upward trend line in power consumption in the US.
I see no reason to suspect Germany would be much different.
Do you have any EVIDENCE that any of this has actually HAPPENED? In 2004 they were at .4% of Germany’s total energy according to your own cite. That was 7 years ago. Where are they TODAY?
And yes, I read your whole cite…it was after all only two paragraphs. I even re-read it. It still says nothing more than COULD do it. Have they? Do you have any evidence they have done so? More than a 2 paragraph quote in Wiki?
What am I supposed to chew on? Germany was the fastest growing producer of geothermal. That’s nice…what does it mean in terms of being able to use geothermal to make up for the proposed losses in nuclear? Do you have any actual numbers or hard data?
According to that blurb Germany has increased geothermal by 2,774%…which, if my math isn’t failing me would put their current total geothermal at around 8%. Do you have any evidence that it’s at around 8%? That’s a rather large increase…how much more can they get out of geothermal? Do you have any projections on that? Can they get 5% more out of what they have? 10%? 50%
Your OP here is very slim on actual facts, your cites are laughable, and you seem to have a serious attitude. If you want to demonstrate that Germany can get rid of their nuclear energy then demonstrate it. I’m curious as to why they are buying more power from France than they have in the past, if all this geothermal and wind are able to step up to fill nuclear powers shoes though. Any thoughts on that?
To be honest Bo, you have no idea what those cites actually said, which is jack all.
We’ve been over this a hundred times. You know nothing about math, power generation technologies, or public safety. And you don’t really care to. We get it: if you wish to wallow in your ignorance, enjoy, but please don’t vomit it back up all over the public.
Yes, the TBA said they could do it. You said they could not, that it was akin to using a “magic pony” method. Unless you have someplace to find facts that contradict them, I’ll take it that you were talking out of your ass and have no real idea what they can and cannot do.
According to my math, that’s slightly more than 11% of their total energy consumption today.
You actually quoted the hard numbers given in the cite then ask if I have any. :rolleyes:
As I said, your argument amounts to “well they haven’t done it 100% yet, so it obviously can’t be done”. It’s dismissive and ignorant, and the type of attitude that would have prevented such achievements as going to the moon or developing the atomic bomb. Hell, it would have prevented developing the nuclear power plants you love so much.
If you just look at the news stories that pop up when you google, you’d see that Germany is currently buying power because they have decided to prioritize taking 7 nuclear plants offline immediately after the Fukushima incident rather than wait; they have decided they would rather buy power now until they have more geothermal plants online than run the risks associated with nuclear generation themselves.
If you had read the article linked in the OP, you would know this:
The truth is, the article in the OP has a ton of facts, which you have ignored or not read at all.
You came in and simply decided to mock the topic (“magic pony” was the phrase you used and then later referenced), and your own arguments have no facts or even thought behind them except knee jerk “anything Bo says is stupid” attitude.
The German government agency tasked with assessing the situation says they can supply all their energy needs with geothermal alone. I’ve cited it and quoted it twice, even once bolding AND underlining it, but you have yet to read and understand it. FFS you even quoted it once, and still ignored it while claiming I had no facts. You want to contradict what the TAB said, you dig up some facts to support your contention that they are wrong. Otherwise, AFAIK, they have a better idea of what their country and their technology can do than you do.
The German government has decided it is practical. I’ll take their decision about what is practical for them over your decision, made without any facts at all, about what is or is not practical for Germany.
Unless you have some cites that can show that it won’t work or will lead to some kind of terrible economic or other disastrous situation, you have nothing but a baseless argument.
It seems dishonest to ban nuclear and dirty coal, but to buy power made from coal and uranium elsewhere. To do that, you are simply exporting your problems to other people.
