We got coal plants,
We got coal
Only reason why we don't use it is EU pressure
EU pressure will mean shit if people would get angry
Ve vill burn ze coal
Coal imports are easy, the issue with gas is that it is difficult to transport outside of pipelines, but you can just get a shipload of coal, you don't need a specific kind of ship to transport a shitloard of coal.
We still extract Lignite(brown coal) and we could easily increase the production.
>NATO has 6 months to end the war before Europe freezes
Freezing Europe can suck my dick.
I got a wienerlestove that heats up the entire house. I even got an old wood and coal fired oven in the old washkitchen. And I got more than enough wood to last the entire winter.
As long as the Russians dont make it over the Rhine, dont give a flying frick if these subhuman animals turn off the flow of natural gas.
I even don't give a frick if the FRICKING EU decide to let Europe freeze because MUH MOTHERFRICKING CLIMATE
We still got a shitload of coal in germany. We are just too fricking green to use it.
Gives you an idea: Climate is much more important to politicians than humans. I hope they let Europe freeze until Europe stands up and grabs the forklifts for a march on Brussels and the other capitals. Don't forget TONS of rope
Losing less than 7% of our energy production isn't enough to make anyone here freeze.
You must not understand the problem at hand. First of all gas power plants have a different purpose than coal and nuclear plants for the grid. Those give you a baseline of required electricity while gas fills in temporary higher demand as they can be turned up and down much quicker. Second, gas heaters in homes won't just get exchanged for electric ones over night. German chemical industry and heavy industry needs gas for ovens and chemical processes too. None of these can be easily substituted for and that is why this is such a huge problem for Germany. We would have to import LNG gas from other countries -the netherlands mostly- but price aside they don't have the capacity to supply all of Europe anyway if Russia shuts off supply entirely.
But if all of the electricity that was generated with gas will be generated by other means, including coal then that gas can be used for those applications that need gas. It's not like Europe has no gas whatsoever.
Have you ever BBQ'd with gas versus coal? Ever notice its much more difficult to control the heat of a coal fire versus gas? With coal you just kind of have to ride the wave, but gas is simply adjusting a valve.
This is the same issue for power generation. Sudden 20-30% spike that a coal boiler simply can't ramp up to so quickly, but a gas boiler can.
Also tomorrow I want you to 3x the horse power in your car with whatever you have lying around in your garage. No no, its simple, all you have to do is just steal your neighbor's motor and hook it into your drive shaft. Should be simple to do in 24 hours.
Thats the level of moronic people saying you can just swap. You simply do not understand the breadth and scale of the energy sector and that it is a massive ship that doesn't withstand shock or change well.
Not entirely true. Actually every German wants to invest in renewables, but it's very important that the wind turbines and power lines are not in their back yard.
You can't simply start up a coal boiler you mothballed 10 years ago. You also can't 2-3x your previously reduced coal production. Russia is feathering the throttle to keep you just enough in supply from doing anything drastic, and then they're going to cut it off at first freeze and see what happens.
If you had the equivalent of an at least partly competent supreme court you could probably overturn all that green energy BS. Revamp your coal plants, put new scrubbers on them to satisfy the greens and public conscious, then rev up the coal production. Germany is quite literally sitting on one of the largest coal reserves in the world and in the past you even came up with gasification methods to run combustion engines off of coal and wood.
>green energy BS
could you elaborate on what part is BS >put new scrubbers on them to satisfy the greens and public conscious
do you think scrubbers are magical -100% pollutant mods or something
You can never run a grid completely on non-nuclear renewables. Some renewable technologies also use *more* natural resources rather than less. The problem is chemicals and pollutants, which again proportionally renewable technologies such as solar panels, copper mining, and lithium tech generate *more* pollutants rather than less. The carbon cycle of the earth is a natural cycle, historically an excess of CO2 in the atmosphere leads to an increase in photosynthesizing biomass which eventually leads to an uptick of atmospheric oxygen. Observe ice core records of the earths average temperature over the last 20k years alone and you will look at a chaotic jigsaw puzzle that bounces around with little to no immediately apparent causes up until relatively recently. For most of human prehistory earth was majority tundra planet climate.
>you can't only use renewables
currently, yes, like the other anon said
I don't see how this is a reason to make more coal plants and work them harder >climate change is natural and good and nothing we do affects it
what does this have to do with the thread outside of "I don't think pollution is real"
That depends on who's map you're using. Russia has spent all night claiming they were moving in to encircle Lyschansk, which would be them pretty squarely along those dots. If that was a total load of bullshit, however, then you'd be right.
>NATO has 6 months to end the war before Europe freezes
Freezing Europe can suck my dick.
I got a wienerlestove that heats up the entire house. I even got an old wood and coal fired oven in the old washkitchen. And I got more than enough wood to last the entire winter.
As long as the Russians dont make it over the Rhine, dont give a flying frick if these subhuman animals turn off the flow of natural gas.
I even don't give a frick if the FRICKING EU decide to let Europe freeze because MUH MOTHERFRICKING CLIMATE
We still got a shitload of coal in germany. We are just too fricking green to use it.
Gives you an idea: Climate is much more important to politicians than humans. I hope they let Europe freeze until Europe stands up and grabs the forklifts for a march on Brussels and the other capitals. Don't forget TONS of rope
>thinks gas is only used for heating. >spergs out when he can't buy chicken tendies at the super market because no one can make plastic.
Natural gas and oil are base components in everything. So congrats on the wood stove, I hope you have a good recipe on how to prepare wood.
They really need to stop saying "climate", it's just a matter of saying, "I do not want to live in a perpetual fricking hotbox where you can't even sweat anymore."
It's that simple. Do you want comfortable living temperatures in the heat index of 115 degrees, or do you want the ACTUAL temperature to be 125 all the time? We're already pushing the limits of our ability to survive as a fricking species.
Seriously, even a temperature of 115 degrees with a humidity level of just 35 percent is a suicidal 143 heat index. And the humidity level in the South is rarely that low except in winter.
>6 months to end the war before Europe freezes
Do people actually believe this? The frick?
You should really reconsider your sources of information. Perhaps start excluding moronic russian propaganda and sensationalistic article titles
t. western europoor
Then make the apropriate argument.
"Your economy will be in a recession as chemical and hi-tech industries struggle without gas" is a very different argument from "Europe will freeze".
>Do people actually believe this? The frick? >You should really reconsider your sources of information. Perhaps start excluding moronic russian propaganda and sensationalistic article titles >t. western europoor
This, Europe will be fine this winter without Russua, just watch.Like all other Russian boasts and threats they grissly exadgerate the effect if Russias biggest energy customers shopping elsewhere. Germany has already cut its use of Russian gas by 2/3s by this winter the use of Russian oil, gas or coal in the EU will be marginal, irrelevent and effect nothing much. Russia is never getting its best customers back. Winning charlie sgeen/putin style they've got all the hiv.
>Do people actually believe this? The frick? >You should really reconsider your sources of information. Perhaps start excluding moronic russian propaganda and sensationalistic article titles >t. western europoor
This, Europe will be fine this winter without Russua, just watch.Like all other Russian boasts and threats they grissly exadgerate the effect if Russias biggest energy customers shopping elsewhere. Germany has already cut its use of Russian gas by 2/3s by this winter the use of Russian oil, gas or coal in the EU will be marginal, irrelevent and effect nothing much. Russia is never getting its best customers back. Winning charlie sgeen/putin style they've got all the hiv.
Its a simple heat and energy balance you frick tards. Explain to me where Germany and the EU are going to get 30-40% of their energy demands? When in reality they probably use 60-70% over the winter on a year basis.
It took Germany 10-15 years to slap together all that shit solar and renewable and they're still not reliable. So I'd really like to hear how they're going to replace gas in six months?
Shall they turn on coal boilers or nuclear plants? The ones they shut down and fired everyone from 10-15 years ago? Who will operate it?
i can understand protesting fossil fuels, but who the frick would protest wind power?
2 years ago
Anonymous
Its because wind turbines generates a magnetic field
2 years ago
Anonymous
That's fricking dumb. I figured it would be because of all the non-recyclable waste they generate, or maybe the noise. We literally live in a massive magnetic field.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Go drive out west and try to enjoy a view without seeing one of those giant fricking fidget spinners.
2 years ago
Anonymous
It puts a smile on my face seeing the wheels of industry turn.
2 years ago
Anonymous
That's not industry; that's corruption. Industry generally has to operate at a profit, without subsidies and kickbacks.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Renewable energy is more profitable than fossil fuels. Most coal and gas companies operating right now would not exist without government subsidies, often funded by taxing renewables.
Once the start up costs are covered fossil fuels simply cannot compete with the more efficient running and lack of ongoing fuel costs that renewable offer, which is why governments tax them to keep thier coal and gas industry donors competitive
If you've ever wondered why you get charged by the power company to use your own damn solar panels, now you know.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Muh view
What a woman argument
2 years ago
Anonymous
They look fricking hype as shit. Do you not enjoy the sight of industry and progress?
2 years ago
Anonymous
boomers..
2 years ago
Anonymous
environmentalists seethe because the turbines genocide local bird life in a significant way
2 years ago
Anonymous
Not true. That's based upon the brain diarrhea from a lying shitsack, and one wind turbine field in California using out-dated windmills in a migratory bird throughway, that have since been dismantled and replaced. More than a decade ago.
2 years ago
Anonymous
It actually is true. It is massively exaggerated, but it does kill off a lot of bird life. The real problem is the blades they use. They are fabricated from a fiberglass material, once the blades reach their life span and are decommissioned they are tossed off into a landfill/buried. They can be "recycled", but it is absurdly expensive and not wide scale, so most of the time it's not even bothered with.
Pic also related.
I wish people were way more informed on their information in regards to this. In my opinion the best solution is hydro / nuclear.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Hydro has massive ramifications on water supply and needs extensive planning, even more-so than Nuclear, and could be reasonably replaced with "more nuclear" or cleaner gas
see: China's water woes
2 years ago
Anonymous
Nuclear is the superior option to all others, but, as usual, the military fricks everything up. The nuclear authority does not allow funding (functionally) for nuclear plants that don't create weapons-grade fissile material. As it stands, the nuclear power industry is just a front for our nuclear weapons development budget, and I really wish it wasn't.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Hydro has massive ramifications on water supply and needs extensive planning, even more-so than Nuclear, and could be reasonably replaced with "more nuclear" or cleaner gas
see: China's water woes
In the long term, hydro only has value as a form of physical battery complementing solar/nuclear.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Better use liquified air in deep salt caverns or H2 to store energy, leave the surface for food or conservation of nature habitats.
H2 has the added benefit that it can be used for trains, cars and all kinds of agricultural machines.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Fine, but that's in the very, very long-term.
2 years ago
Anonymous
True. However, H2 from renewable energy will replace LNG/natgas in the next 10 years.
Buy Linde stock, they will be the ones controlling the spice, so to speak 😉
Check this list of already running projects with H2 in northern Germany:
https://www.ihk-nord.de/produktmarken/schwerpunkte/energiepolitik-industriepolitik/wasserstoff-landkarte-2020-4946362
2 years ago
Anonymous
I bought some in 2018 at 139€.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>one wind turbine field in California using out-dated windmills in a migratory bird throughway
All of them are in bird thoroughfares.
Birds tend to fly with the wind.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Painting them greatly reduces the number of bird impacts. At that point, it's basically natural selection.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Pollution kills hundreds of times more birds every year, stop regurgitating shell propaganda
2 years ago
Anonymous
eyes sores + bat killers
2 years ago
Anonymous
Smart people. Wind is fine if you want small scale shit, but it's really only viable in Kansas and is otherwise an eyesore, a danger, and a wildlife killer. And now for those that don't know here's some of them exploding https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vrT1t7uK1fs
They are building 3-4 right now and i believe also getting more gas from norway. Middle east are reconstructing their infrastructure as well. Polish and South Korean presidents together with representatives of energy companies met during NATO summit and signed 60 billion dolar contract for nuclear power plants. Czech also signed some contract with Koreans. First couple of years energy will be a bit more expensive, meaning it will reflect on national debt, after that this region is gucci.
Uh, the LNG plant in the US exploded it's down for months. So now you're talking about getting the exploded plant back up and producing 6x its previous deliveries? Not possible. Chemical plants have a set rate and they can't just make more without capital investment.
>the LNG plant > "THE"
(You) fricking mongoloid. The United States is not Scotland oblast.
https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/us-lng-exports-fall-lowest-since-feb-after-freeport-explosion-data-2022-07-01/
~11% temporary reduction, 2nd largest LNG plant in the U.S.
Also a relevant read:
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Why-Chinese-Imports-Of-US-LNG-Collapsed.html
~24% of total global sales, now available for the EU
Only vatBlack person morons actually believe this.
>NATO has 6 months to end the war before Europe freezes
Freezing Europe can suck my dick.
I got a wienerlestove that heats up the entire house. I even got an old wood and coal fired oven in the old washkitchen. And I got more than enough wood to last the entire winter.
As long as the Russians dont make it over the Rhine, dont give a flying frick if these subhuman animals turn off the flow of natural gas.
I even don't give a frick if the FRICKING EU decide to let Europe freeze because MUH MOTHERFRICKING CLIMATE
We still got a shitload of coal in germany. We are just too fricking green to use it.
Gives you an idea: Climate is much more important to politicians than humans. I hope they let Europe freeze until Europe stands up and grabs the forklifts for a march on Brussels and the other capitals. Don't forget TONS of rope
>Climate is much more important to politicians than humans >the biggest threat to the survival of humanity as a species is more important than single humans
Why are the french so pro nuclear and the germans so anti nuclear?
Superior forward thinking? Green movement were seen as anti-french? Germans are more autistic than once thought?
A lot of left wing nuclear opposition is literally the result of decades of KGB propaganda trying to destabilise their geopolitical rivals attempts from developing their nuclear bomb programs. Germany, alongside the Anglosphere countries got hit particularly hard in that regard.
A lot of left wing nuclear opposition is literally the result of decades of KGB propaganda trying to destabilise their geopolitical rivals attempts from developing their nuclear bomb programs. Germany, alongside the Anglosphere countries got hit particularly hard in that regard.
Muh Chernobyl(moronation of party officials) and Fukushima(tsunami)
I really fricking hate the chernobyl/fukushima scare even my mom and dad weren't immune to it. I had to spend literally days teaching them how they fricking work and the actual risks, not the oil industries propaganda.
A large percentage of Germany experienced the descent of the fallout from Chernobyl. Even to this very day, it is dangerous to eat certain plants and wildlife in Bavaria that are still contaminated with radioactive waste.
>Even to this very day, it is dangerous to eat certain plants and wildlife in Bavaria that are still contaminated with radioactive waste.
complete bullshit
No, you still shouldn't eat large amounts of boar meat or wild mushrooms. Eating it every once in a while is fine, but you shouldn't make it a central part of your diet.
Refer to:
https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/three-decades-german-mushrooms-still-show-imprint-chernobyl-2021-10-08/
This is from 2010: https://phys.org/news/2010-08-radioactive-boars-germany.html
From 2015: https://www.enca.com/life/travel/wild-boar-bavaria-show-high-levels-radioactivity
From 2022: https://newsrnd.com/news/2022-01-20-hunter-measures-alarmingly-high-radioactive-contamination-in-wild-boar-in-bavaria---green-politicians-warn-of-danger.rJboK0-wpY.html
>In the months following the deposition of radiocesium from the Chernobyl fallout, levels ranging from a few becquerels of Cesium 137 per kilogram to several thousand becquerels per kilogram were measured in wild boar meat in Germany. >In 2020, the range of Cs 137 contamination in wild boar is still as wide, and maximum levels in some regions are higher today than in 1986. >One phenomenon is of particular importance: the large differences in radiation levels in wild boar occur not only between different regions in Germany, but also in areas more highly contaminated by Chernobyl fallout. >For example, it is also possible to have 2020 samples of wild boar from the same hunting ground simultaneously below 100 Bq Cs 137 per kg but also of several thousand Bq/kg. In addition, large seasonal variations in contamination can also occur in an area.
Wow! A THOUSAND Becquerels?
A THOUSAND becquerels of Cs137???? That's terrible! That could account for about... Uhh... An extra 0.5% of your yearly natural radiation dose! That's almost HALF of what you'd get from taking a transatlantic flight!
2 years ago
Anonymous
It varies between a thousand and SEVERAL thousand anon. 3,700 Bq per kilogram of meat is a large number and consequently considered to be dangerous. Several of Bavaria's boars feature values higher than that.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>3,700 Bq per > one kilogram porkburger
Worth it. So fricking worth it.
I bet you don't know what any of those numbers mean or imply but you just decided it's dangerous because some green kartoffel b***h told you it is.
I pray that when intelligent life visits our planet, they don't assume Germans are representative for the rest of humanity. Because they would vaporize our planet the if they did.
french found out in like 60s that they don't have shit in france for resources so they deployed mass nukes in like 15 years because uranium is not only easy to get from various sources but mainly lasts forever as a fuel (people don't even realize that you only refuel a nuke plant like 5 a year and a nuke ship often doesn't even need refuel across its whole lifecycle) and were green ever since.
germans are germans. when they decide on something the go full moronic and they will never accept they did a mistake and just double down. they always had plenty of coal so they were never pressured into finding an alternative, after chernobyl germans decided nuclear is the devil so since then it just had to go. then they insisted renewable = good so they started massive deployement solar and wind since 2000s. those can't work without gas or hydro though so you end up moronic country that claims we need to do anything with co2 while shutting down nukes and increasing coal now because any other way would require them to admit they did a mistake and german's just don't do that.
Nuclear energy is cheaper if you need nuclear weapons anyway.
You have infrastructure for processing and refining Uranium anyway.
You can use your reactors to make plutonium and you can use your old decayed warheads for reactor fuel.
You know jack shit about german politics. All you do is reiterate memes you've seen on some asian basket fricking plaza.
Germany has had a long standing anti-nuclear movement consisting of all kinds of greens as well as some esoteric spastics plus a considerable amount of people that were directly influenced by the Tshernobyl disaster. With Fukushima these movements gained momentum and finally it was decided to stop nuclear energy production. However the majority of anti-nuclear proponents assumed that you would go full renewable instead. German politicians in power at the time were (are) very much influenced by the fossil fuel industry and so they used this momentum to put more money into these sectors. If you ask me the extend to which this happened was just corruption and many politicians of the then ruling party have been proven to be corrupt too so take that as you like. And now we are in a perverse limbo of contracts with fossil energy suppliers that can't be cancelled until decades in the future, esoteric spastics believing windmills are evil, greens that "wanna preserve rare species and nature" and average joes not wanting windmills in their back yard all blocking construction of these renewables and necessary infrastructure.
In hindsight it was obviously a mistake to stop nuclear in favour of coal but the people that wanted it stopped were outplayed by corrupt politicians and reinvesting into new nuclear plants wouldn't even change anything now (as construction takes years), wouldn't be cheaper and quiet literally be a step back if you assume that renewables are the end goal.
TL:DR Germans get outplayed by their corrupt politicians and now it just makes no sense to go back
>In hindsight it was obviously a mistake to stop nuclear in favour of coal but the people that wanted it stopped were outplayed by corrupt politicians and reinvesting into new nuclear plants wouldn't even change anything now (as construction takes years), wouldn't be cheaper and quiet literally be a step back if you assume that renewables are the end goal.
whether you're german or not, this is exactly the german mentality i talked about. it isn't "hindsight". it's just arrogance that results in complete denial of reality. despite wanting to do ""everything" to decrease emmisions, they decided and worse, insist on moving from nuclear before coal and gas. they completely ignore reality where nuclear is the cleanest source (together with wind, except nuclear is clean 24/7 while wind is clean when it blows with the capacity being like ~30 maybe 40%. solar is more dirty and in germany the capacity factor is atrocious getting as low as like 15-20%.). they also ignore the reality where despite repeating renewables are cheap and nuclear is expensive, germany has the 2nd most expensive electricity in europe (after denmark, unsurprisingly another country dependent on wind).
the "nuclear takes too long to build, it's too late now" has been repeated for the past 20 years and i don't doubt it will still be the excuse in the next 50 years. yes, nuclear is expensive upfront but cheapest in the long run. the think is, again, germoney spend pumping unbelievable amount of money into renewables and keeps doing so that it's moronic excuse.
after 20+ years of germoney repeating this crap while doubling down on renewables, they have most expensive electricity, complete depence on russian gas ( "it's mostly for heating" yeah if only you invested in switching to heat pumps, naturally germany didn't do that) and emmision wise, the ultimate goal, there are about average (compared to france that has completely clean grid for past 50 years).
You completely ignore everything I said further proving that you are just a moron and to top it of you are spouting disproven phallacies.
Again, it was a movement of morons, historically scarred people and opportunistic greens that wanted more renewables. Doesn't matter that it would've been smarter to kill coal first because there was no way that would ever happen anyway. Industry influence on politics from nuclear wasn't very strong but fossil has a huge lobby. Conservative german politicians sold out to this lobby and that is the reason for this clusterfrick.
And nuclear is only cheap if you ignore the cost of waste storage/recycling which is a problem that isn't even close to getting solved.
>However the majority of anti-nuclear proponents assumed that you would go full renewable instead.
It is almost like there are nobody there that have any idea about engineering or power grids.
> new nuclear plants wouldn't even change anything now (as construction takes years)
Not really. You could have a new plant up and running under a year after the zoning is cleared and construction begins if you cut back on excessive red tape, regulation and certificates. A lot which have been lobbied in by said fossil fuel barons and green morons as one way to gimp nuclear by its knees by making each plant snail paced to be built and operational. Also massively increases costs which helps a lot in marketing and lobbying the gullible.
The number one problem with so called "renewables" like wind and solar is stability. When is the wind blowing, when is the sun shining. Spread across the year a solar panel has only five hourse per day per year that it does effective work. That is 5/24h. Does that sound efficient to you? Wind, aside from the noise also wrecks havoc on wild life, litters the landscape and disposal of old wind turbines is similar to disposing nuclear waste. As in they need to be buried in concrete cases due to the fiberglass not ending up in the water circulation and in your bloodstream.
From non nuclear greenies only hydro and geothermo are decent yet very limited due to geography. Solar is only viable in orbit where it has 24/7 eyesight with the sun and thus has a decently constant power output. Wind is a complete meme through and through.
If fusion every becomes a thing all signs are pointing to it being a premium power source that will have x ratio of fusion:fission(nuclear). Simply due to several factors of complexity in its construction as well as material acquisition. A fission reactors innards are hotter then the suns core and thus need extremely power magnetic fields to levitate the hellish hot plasma. That aint cheap.
The main problem in Germany right now is building the windmills and solar panels. Similarily to how nuclear would be cucked by bureocracy if you wanted to rebuilt capacities, renewables get cucked by bureocracy. (see
>Not really. You could have a new plant up and running under a year after the zoning is cleared and construction begins if you cut back on excessive red tape, regulation and certificates
You definitely could not do this without brewing some spicy tap water and killing half the workers through 20-hour shifts. Fastest construction in the 21st century was 39 months in South Korea, but the global average is 190 months. Sure you can say the absolute best example is what we should do but this is always true, for everything, it doesn't map to reality. If you apply the same logic to renewables you'd be shitting them out faster than your milk goes bad.
) Germany killed parts of its renewable energy sector and many of those firms are working for foreign customers now because there is no way to legally build much more in Germany at the moment.
Also the original plan was to use gas for base load if I am not mistaken lol
If you wanna talk theoretical technologies Germany is much more likely gonna be looking at H2 for energy storage. That shit has become quiet efficient in recent years and they have basically infinite supply of water.
>However the majority of anti-nuclear proponents assumed that you would go full renewable instead.
It is almost like there are nobody there that have any idea about engineering or power grids.
> new nuclear plants wouldn't even change anything now (as construction takes years)
Not really. You could have a new plant up and running under a year after the zoning is cleared and construction begins if you cut back on excessive red tape, regulation and certificates. A lot which have been lobbied in by said fossil fuel barons and green morons as one way to gimp nuclear by its knees by making each plant snail paced to be built and operational. Also massively increases costs which helps a lot in marketing and lobbying the gullible.
The number one problem with so called "renewables" like wind and solar is stability. When is the wind blowing, when is the sun shining. Spread across the year a solar panel has only five hourse per day per year that it does effective work. That is 5/24h. Does that sound efficient to you? Wind, aside from the noise also wrecks havoc on wild life, litters the landscape and disposal of old wind turbines is similar to disposing nuclear waste. As in they need to be buried in concrete cases due to the fiberglass not ending up in the water circulation and in your bloodstream.
From non nuclear greenies only hydro and geothermo are decent yet very limited due to geography. Solar is only viable in orbit where it has 24/7 eyesight with the sun and thus has a decently constant power output. Wind is a complete meme through and through.
If fusion every becomes a thing all signs are pointing to it being a premium power source that will have x ratio of fusion:fission(nuclear). Simply due to several factors of complexity in its construction as well as material acquisition. A fission reactors innards are hotter then the suns core and thus need extremely power magnetic fields to levitate the hellish hot plasma. That aint cheap.
hydroplants are local enviromental disasters by themselves (and if we use stupid commies running a powerplant as a danger for western operation, i suggest you don't read about the several, mainly chinese, hydro plant failures. those disasters make chernobyl look like stumbling your toe).
the problem with greenies is that they think electricity comes from wall plug. which doesn't matter if they are irrelevant in politics decision making but in europe they are very relevant and especially in germany so here we are.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>the chinks build dams out of corncobs and egg cartons so all hydro dams are bad
Lol lmao
2 years ago
Anonymous
i'm not saying that. hydroplants are amazing but not every country is lucky to be norway to be able to generate and store electricity solely from them.
i'm pointing out that it's exact same logic why "nuclear bad" in west. chernobyl was a communism problem just as the hydro failures are a chink problem, neither are nuclear and hydro problems respectively.
>Not really. You could have a new plant up and running under a year after the zoning is cleared and construction begins if you cut back on excessive red tape, regulation and certificates
You definitely could not do this without brewing some spicy tap water and killing half the workers through 20-hour shifts. Fastest construction in the 21st century was 39 months in South Korea, but the global average is 190 months. Sure you can say the absolute best example is what we should do but this is always true, for everything, it doesn't map to reality. If you apply the same logic to renewables you'd be shitting them out faster than your milk goes bad.
>You could have a new plant up and running under a year after the zoning is cleared and construction begins if you cut back on excessive red tape, regulation and certificates.
and you could have every hospital fully funded and with beds to spare if you stopped doing surgery without anaesthetic, regulations on nuclear energy are not some nanny state overreaching it's wholly sensible precautions >Wind, aside from the noise also wrecks havoc on wild life, litters the landscape and disposal of old wind turbines is similar to disposing nuclear waste. As in they need to be buried in concrete cases due to the fiberglass not ending up in the water circulation and in your bloodstream.
you're not supposed to build wind turbines close enough that you can hear them, the argument against them by locals is always "it looks ugly" despite property values not being changed by being near them
I don't know what you mean by litters the landscape
and you can't build a fricking coal plant out of recyclable materials either, the difference is one outputs pollution all through its service life before it's buried in a casket >Wind is a complete meme through and through.
wind literally supplies 70% of all electricity in my country, if that's a meme then I'd hate to find out what gas is
as for fusion, you can't fricking run a country on "hopefully we'll have infinite clean power from a technological breakthrough soon"
2 years ago
Anonymous
>you're not supposed to build wind turbines close enough that you can hear them
Too bad Europe has zero depopulated wastelands to stick them in.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>wind literally supplies 70% of all electricity in my country
What does you country do when it's not windy where the turbines are?
2 years ago
Anonymous
do you not know you can have more than one wind farm
2 years ago
Anonymous
Does your country have a population density of 3/100 km^2? If you're trying to run wind farms as your base load your mains power engineers should all be shot, they're shit for that you'll need every square inch you can get.
Remind me, how many trillion euros did Germany spend on solar? Protip: the sun doesn't shine enough in Europe (other than remote parts of Spain) for large-scale solar to work. Nuclear reactors are the *only* viable alternative to fossil fuels for Germany, and the Greens got rid of them in favor of solar.
>It was Fukushima! >Begins denuking in 01 under PM now on Gazprom board
Wow what a crazy coincidence and totally related to an event that happened almost a decade later
>Germans are more autistic than once thought?
There's a joke about a German having their driving license confiscated by the police >Hey bro so like what if the police took your license but you still had to go somewhere would you still drive >How could I drive if I don't have a license? >I know it's like illegal yeah, but its important, you have to get there in ti- >YOU CANNOT DRIVE A CAR WITHOUT A LICENSE
It wasn't just the Germans that the USSR was worried about leaving. It was the 20 million vatniks they imported into East Germany they were trying to contain.
>Why are the french so pro nuclear and the germans so anti nuclear?
Years of Chernobyl propaganda dispelled by Russian influences (who are interested in firmly positioning Germany on the gas dildopipe).
>Europe should have embraced alternative energy long ago to prevent being Russia's hostage
And before fully embracing it, they should've stick to the nuclear at all costs (probs also after bc why not).
Optimal is nuclear as the baseload and methane to finish off, plus hydro baseload until you run out of really good sources (which everybody has, by now).
>First of all gas power plants have a different purpose than coal and nuclear plants for the grid. Those give you a baseline of required electricity while gas fills in temporary higher demand as they can be turned up and down much quicker.
That's partly true. Gas is well suited for peak loads, but it is often used to cover base loads or intermediate loads as well. And this would be essentially mandatory for Germany to lower emissions.
You must not understand the problem at hand. First of all gas power plants have a different purpose than coal and nuclear plants for the grid. Those give you a baseline of required electricity while gas fills in temporary higher demand as they can be turned up and down much quicker. Second, gas heaters in homes won't just get exchanged for electric ones over night. German chemical industry and heavy industry needs gas for ovens and chemical processes too. None of these can be easily substituted for and that is why this is such a huge problem for Germany. We would have to import LNG gas from other countries -the netherlands mostly- but price aside they don't have the capacity to supply all of Europe anyway if Russia shuts off supply entirely.
Absolutely. There was even some politicians trying to shill gas a means to carry baseline loads because it produced less CO2. But this board is so full of morons equating gas needs to electricity needs in general I had to correct that.
I agree, but I thought since most people on this board are Americans it bears pointing out, because to my understanding the US grid often uses natural gas for base or intermediate load. I would also like to point out that while you can't easily just swap heating for homes and industrial processes away from gas, people were warning Germany they were going to have a problem ten years ago, so they had every opportunity to plan ahead. So what you're saying is all correct, but to be clear it also doesn't excuse Germany for putting themselves in this situation.
Nothing excuses Germany's moronation. Their russian appeasement politics read like pre-ww2 Hitler appeasement. Energy politics and everything about it are royally cucked and in the hands of the industry which is just working into their own pockets. This entire country is fricked sideways but we are so wealthy that no one bothers to fix it. Yet the majority of posters here understand jack shit about it and post their moronic opinions based on flawed assumptions so that an actual valuable discussion never takes place.
Don't forget that most Russian production of military equipment beyond small arms is highly dependent upon Siemens and their heavy machine tools, particularly CNC.
Their automated factory line production is officially on suicide watch.
>t. PLC programmer
2 years ago
Anonymous
Russians now starving for German Siemen
2 years ago
Anonymous
goddamit, get the frick out
2 years ago
Anonymous
Yo, Carlos come on man.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>no automated factories because no German parts >no manual factories because vatniks are too cheap to pay wages >when workers striked, the vatniks started screeching about how nobody expected any damn wages during the Great Patriotic War
>> Using FIRMS instead of an OPIR layer in THRESHER
Unbefrickinglievable. If there's one thing I can't stand it's fricking using FIRMS instead of an OPIR layer in THRESHER.
Tell me about an OPIR layer in THRESHER. Why should an OPIR layer in THRESHER be used instead of FIRMS? Is an OPIR layer in THRESHER really that much better?
> Is an OPIR layer in THRESHER really that much better?
In comparison to FIRMS? You bet. It's basically how to use THRESHER if you don't prefer it with OPIR.
Put simply, the instrumental affordances vis-a-vis OPIR and FIRMS necessitate all manner of reflexivities, albeit juxtaposed both within *and* upon THRESHER.
This is 100% a gas war. Putin is trying desperately to secure his oligarchs’ export market with Europe with Germany being the largest customer. The big gas deposits found in eastern Ukraine about 10 years ago started all this. The West saw a chance to cut out Russia from the gas export market as all the export facilities reside in Ukraine. Putin absolutely couldn’t have that so he invaded shortly afterwards in 2014. The war successfully made Shell pull out of a big gas deal due to proximity. Gas was still flowing so the West just shoved their thumbs in its mouth as usual. Nordstream 2 was Russia’s play to secure their gas sales to Europe via Germany — the West refused to let them have it, killing it late last year. A few months later, Putin invades again. Trying to regime-change Ukraine and secure gas sales.
Russia is a tin pot oil state there to enrich a small handful of energy oligarchs. It’s their fault. But Germany has certainly been enabling it.
people are saying this war turned the board into a bunch of irrelevant bullshit but it's teaching me so much about other random salient things i can't help but be a little thankful
Keep tuning in. /k/ will teach you one fact a week that you will find fascinating and necessary that you never knew you wanted to know until you read it here.
As for the energy problem Germany is facing, it is a problem and it will be close. However, using it as a weapon will not really work. Germany is willed to take it on the chin and so is the rest of Europe, as can be seen in the last two rounds of sanctions.
Consider the picture. The faint line is the average reserve 2019 to 2021. The thick blue line is the reserves right now. The orange dots is where the reserves have to be to make it trough the winter. The first orange dot is the 1st Oct, the second 1st Nov.
What is done right now to make it to the orange reserves? We will use a little bit more of oil, coal, nuclear, solar and wind, where possible. Also we will import more energy from our Neighbors where possible. A new LNG terminal is built to faster import natgas from alternative sources. Key industry reduced it's natgas consumption and may, depending on the reserves, be shut down.
A law will be introduced that allows landlords to turn the minimal temp for shared natgas heating from now 21°C to 18°C.
Linde, largest source of natgas and other industry gases in Germany, got a few billions to build H2 infrastructure to replace natgas with H2. This is a recent development and will bear fruit in two to three years when the first natgas plants get switched to H2. It's a question of scale now, not feasibility.
Teach me about life, /k/. I am an empty vessel.
https://i.imgur.com/9ZAyYyQ.jpg
Russians now starving for German Siemen
The FuRK (Funny Republic of Kekistan) is that way.
If you had the equivalent of an at least partly competent supreme court you could probably overturn all that green energy BS. Revamp your coal plants, put new scrubbers on them to satisfy the greens and public conscious, then rev up the coal production. Germany is quite literally sitting on one of the largest coal reserves in the world and in the past you even came up with gasification methods to run combustion engines off of coal and wood.
The idea is to be amongst the first industry nations that get away from CO2.
Another interesting pic.
As can be seen in the light blue line, the Jamal-pipeline dried up shortly after the war.
Both, Nordstream1 (Orange) and Megal-pipeline have been lower output than usual.
It also should be noted that other countries in Europe have similar problems and it's expected that we will not make it to the 80% to 90% reserves. More industry will likely be shut down. The industry itself is hastily triening to switch to other sources such as H2, which isn't yet available in large enough amounts.
Tldr; Germans have to wear a pullover this winter and some Industry will shut down, but they will take it on the chin. In the long term Russia is hurting itself more than it does Europe.
Yeah. The energy card was one of the few Russia had against Europe but using it in such a blatant way will absolutely slap Moscow back in the face, now no one will argue that dependence on Russia isn't a danger since Putin has shown it's a weapon he WILL use against them (he also kindly reminded everyone that Russia sure as hell isn't a reasonable trade partner). They have no choice but to invest heavily into diversification for long-term safety.
It's another case of Monke shooting himself in the foot.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I'm just waiting for the news conference where Putin tells the EU "Buy our petroenergy or Russia will nuke you." Effectively, he's already said that in so many words.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Buy our petroenergy or Russia will nuke you.
"no, we're good thanks"
The worst part is Russia has been cutting off gas even to paying customers that bend over backwards for them.
Because what they really needed right now is to show everyone that playing nice with them really doesn't work.
Another interesting pic.
As can be seen in the light blue line, the Jamal-pipeline dried up shortly after the war.
Both, Nordstream1 (Orange) and Megal-pipeline have been lower output than usual.
It also should be noted that other countries in Europe have similar problems and it's expected that we will not make it to the 80% to 90% reserves. More industry will likely be shut down. The industry itself is hastily triening to switch to other sources such as H2, which isn't yet available in large enough amounts.
Tldr; Germans have to wear a pullover this winter and some Industry will shut down, but they will take it on the chin. In the long term Russia is hurting itself more than it does Europe.
Source is NDR and the graphs get updated every business day:
https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/info/Gasspeicher-in-Deutschland-So-steht-es-um-die-Fuellstaende,gasspeicher120.html
You can never run a grid completely on non-nuclear renewables. Some renewable technologies also use *more* natural resources rather than less. The problem is chemicals and pollutants, which again proportionally renewable technologies such as solar panels, copper mining, and lithium tech generate *more* pollutants rather than less. The carbon cycle of the earth is a natural cycle, historically an excess of CO2 in the atmosphere leads to an increase in photosynthesizing biomass which eventually leads to an uptick of atmospheric oxygen. Observe ice core records of the earths average temperature over the last 20k years alone and you will look at a chaotic jigsaw puzzle that bounces around with little to no immediately apparent causes up until relatively recently. For most of human prehistory earth was majority tundra planet climate.
>You can never run a grid completely on non-nuclear renewables.
You can, but the investment is huge.
Just as the investment in the existing infrastructure was huge. The nation that finishes it first will be more or less energy independent. Since this is a generational task, just as building existing grids was generational, most nations fail to get started.
Germany is at the forefront of switching to H2 and after that to Fusion (google the Wendelstein X-7 experiment and their involvement with ITER). Natgas was supposed to be a bridge to H2 which will be the bridge to Fusion, now it seems that bridge will be pricier than expected, as we have to import pricey LNG. However, it has only accelerated the larger scale deployment for H2.
In the future (say 50 to 100 years) there is no need to get oil from the ground. We will make our own gasoline and kerosine and all kinds of oils and lubricants from Co2 in the air. Picrel is a site where electricity is used to create Kerosine for air industry. This needs to be scaled up once we have surplus energy.
Again, it's a project on a generational scale, as was the build of the existing grids.
The French and KGB both used greens to poison the well.
I heard it was the Bilderbergs and the Joos.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Forgot the sourcerino, sorry:
https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/technologie/synthetisches-kerosin-emsland-atmosfair-lufthansa-101.html
2 years ago
Anonymous
>You can, but the investment is huge.
And also completely reliant on your country's geography. If you don't have enough rivers good for hydro, or accessible geothermal, you're fricked.
2 years ago
Anonymous
That is objectively wrong. It's alsmost as if you form a sentence that starts with but, then you stop thinking, and then you tell the world your water tight argument.
Even Sweden has enough area for wind and enough area for solar, the problem is we need to get the energy to the H2 production site to make H2 and store it.
At night you burn the H2 from your reserve, just like oil, coal or natgas. Or you use the H2 to make gasoline or natgas from CO2 in the air.
Or you use the energy to fill salt caverns with liquified air which you then use to run a turbine.
Again, it's a new infrastructure as pricey as the infrastructure for oil, coal and natgas and you have to build it.
I doubt you are able to fathom this at all, the quality of your contribution is really low. I recommend to just keep your thoughts to yourself. >:^)
2 years ago
Anonymous
as far as I can tell, CO2 capture is still a rather bad technology, unless people figure out plant-like carbon fixation.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>enough area for wind and enough area for solar,
Wind and solar are unreliable dogshit entirely controlled by the benevolence of the atmosphere. Any plan that makes them the crux of a nation's power generation capabilities is a ploy to sell capacitors to gullible government departments.
2 years ago
Anonymous
If you had read more than what you wanted to, you would have read the solution to it's unreliability in this thread.
But you didn't because you like to stop thinking after the first "but".
2 years ago
Anonymous
>enough area for solar
bro do you know how little northern europe gets sunlight?
2 years ago
Anonymous
Building a solar roof on every commercial building and parking lot would suffice.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Building a solar roof on every commercial building
That's an actual EU policy iirc, coming in the next few years. It's important to start building solar panels in the West though.
2 years ago
Anonymous
im completely OK with this. The building is there, and ugly. cladding it with solar panels is only a win-win
2 years ago
Anonymous
Think of how much nicer parking lots will be with a high airy roof of panels mounted to pergola like frames will be.
2 years ago
Anonymous
You bet. We could be kings.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Enough light for solar panels to work
2 years ago
Anonymous
Could the yield be higher in the Sahara desert? Yes.
Is it still enough, even in winter, if complemented with wind and energy storage? Yes.
>using it as a weapon will not really work
especially since you can only do it once and doing it even once is just going to sink your economy. Germany can always ration industrial use and keep people somewhat warm and somewhat happy for a winter. Russia cannot pull the same shit again, they're already losing access to the market.
NATO has 6 months to end the war before Europe freezes. Russia is getting a taste of its own massed arty barrages. A lovely sight to see.
We got coal plants,
We got coal
Only reason why we don't use it is EU pressure
EU pressure will mean shit if people would get angry
Ve vill burn ze coal
you will subsequently pay the toll
Praying for you krautbro
We don't really got coal unless you want to reopen the 1km deep shafts of the Ruhrgebiet or continue Garzweiler.
We will do what we got to do.
Coal imports are easy, the issue with gas is that it is difficult to transport outside of pipelines, but you can just get a shipload of coal, you don't need a specific kind of ship to transport a shitloard of coal.
you also have a massive Customs and Trade Union with 26 other members just itching to sell their dying coal mining ops to you.
>>t. former mining town resident
We still extract Lignite(brown coal) and we could easily increase the production.
Losing less than 7% of our energy production isn't enough to make anyone here freeze.
Just put on a sweater you fricking pussy
You must not understand the problem at hand. First of all gas power plants have a different purpose than coal and nuclear plants for the grid. Those give you a baseline of required electricity while gas fills in temporary higher demand as they can be turned up and down much quicker. Second, gas heaters in homes won't just get exchanged for electric ones over night. German chemical industry and heavy industry needs gas for ovens and chemical processes too. None of these can be easily substituted for and that is why this is such a huge problem for Germany. We would have to import LNG gas from other countries -the netherlands mostly- but price aside they don't have the capacity to supply all of Europe anyway if Russia shuts off supply entirely.
Very informative anon
But if all of the electricity that was generated with gas will be generated by other means, including coal then that gas can be used for those applications that need gas. It's not like Europe has no gas whatsoever.
Have you ever BBQ'd with gas versus coal? Ever notice its much more difficult to control the heat of a coal fire versus gas? With coal you just kind of have to ride the wave, but gas is simply adjusting a valve.
This is the same issue for power generation. Sudden 20-30% spike that a coal boiler simply can't ramp up to so quickly, but a gas boiler can.
Also tomorrow I want you to 3x the horse power in your car with whatever you have lying around in your garage. No no, its simple, all you have to do is just steal your neighbor's motor and hook it into your drive shaft. Should be simple to do in 24 hours.
Thats the level of moronic people saying you can just swap. You simply do not understand the breadth and scale of the energy sector and that it is a massive ship that doesn't withstand shock or change well.
>Germany needs gas for ovens
As is tradition
>German chemical industry and heavy industry needs gas for ovens
not this shit again
Once again the commies are vastly overstating the number of active ovens in Germany
The EU pressure on Germany:
Not entirely true. Actually every German wants to invest in renewables, but it's very important that the wind turbines and power lines are not in their back yard.
So you're saying they need some room?
your women have been burning coal for decades Hans
You can't simply start up a coal boiler you mothballed 10 years ago. You also can't 2-3x your previously reduced coal production. Russia is feathering the throttle to keep you just enough in supply from doing anything drastic, and then they're going to cut it off at first freeze and see what happens.
>Ve vill burn ze coal
There's a toll involved.
>wants big black dicks
>forgot that big black dicks are often attached to literal dickhead asshats
think it through next time and just invest on a big dildo attached to a sybian instead.
Oh nonononono HAHAHAHAHA
Literally who source?
If you had the equivalent of an at least partly competent supreme court you could probably overturn all that green energy BS. Revamp your coal plants, put new scrubbers on them to satisfy the greens and public conscious, then rev up the coal production. Germany is quite literally sitting on one of the largest coal reserves in the world and in the past you even came up with gasification methods to run combustion engines off of coal and wood.
>green energy BS
could you elaborate on what part is BS
>put new scrubbers on them to satisfy the greens and public conscious
do you think scrubbers are magical -100% pollutant mods or something
You can never run a grid completely on non-nuclear renewables. Some renewable technologies also use *more* natural resources rather than less. The problem is chemicals and pollutants, which again proportionally renewable technologies such as solar panels, copper mining, and lithium tech generate *more* pollutants rather than less. The carbon cycle of the earth is a natural cycle, historically an excess of CO2 in the atmosphere leads to an increase in photosynthesizing biomass which eventually leads to an uptick of atmospheric oxygen. Observe ice core records of the earths average temperature over the last 20k years alone and you will look at a chaotic jigsaw puzzle that bounces around with little to no immediately apparent causes up until relatively recently. For most of human prehistory earth was majority tundra planet climate.
>you can't only use renewables
currently, yes, like the other anon said
I don't see how this is a reason to make more coal plants and work them harder
>climate change is natural and good and nothing we do affects it
what does this have to do with the thread outside of "I don't think pollution is real"
Coal is fairly useless as is, the big thing with Coal is the potential for use as Syngas in industry, but you need expertise and infrastructure.
>stops importing Rußian gas
Germanbro, that's factually not true. The Rußians withheld the supply, simple as.
I've personally seen the 24 hour drill troll to make Mistibishis over to 12Abrams chssis. Sorry if we were sleeping.
You could make coal butter again.
aren’t most of those on the uaf side of the line of contact
That depends on who's map you're using. Russia has spent all night claiming they were moving in to encircle Lyschansk, which would be them pretty squarely along those dots. If that was a total load of bullshit, however, then you'd be right.
Yes, including the Ukrainian salient in the forest west of Izyum, looks like a lot of artillery on that position
Some of them definitely are, theyre trading shells. The area around Severodonetsk is all outbound Polish artillery.
here's Russian claimed control of the territory
90% of of those red squares are on Russian controlled territory.
>NATO has 6 months to end the war before Europe freezes
Freezing Europe can suck my dick.
I got a wienerlestove that heats up the entire house. I even got an old wood and coal fired oven in the old washkitchen. And I got more than enough wood to last the entire winter.
As long as the Russians dont make it over the Rhine, dont give a flying frick if these subhuman animals turn off the flow of natural gas.
I even don't give a frick if the FRICKING EU decide to let Europe freeze because MUH MOTHERFRICKING CLIMATE
We still got a shitload of coal in germany. We are just too fricking green to use it.
Gives you an idea: Climate is much more important to politicians than humans. I hope they let Europe freeze until Europe stands up and grabs the forklifts for a march on Brussels and the other capitals. Don't forget TONS of rope
It's not really a threat to individuals, it's a threat to industry. Lack of LNG would lock up German industry.
>lock up German industry
Not going to happen. Poles are dependent on german gibs.
>thinks gas is only used for heating.
>spergs out when he can't buy chicken tendies at the super market because no one can make plastic.
Natural gas and oil are base components in everything. So congrats on the wood stove, I hope you have a good recipe on how to prepare wood.
Oil can be imported from elsewhere. Gas is the only one that would be hard to replace.
They really need to stop saying "climate", it's just a matter of saying, "I do not want to live in a perpetual fricking hotbox where you can't even sweat anymore."
It's that simple. Do you want comfortable living temperatures in the heat index of 115 degrees, or do you want the ACTUAL temperature to be 125 all the time? We're already pushing the limits of our ability to survive as a fricking species.
Seriously, even a temperature of 115 degrees with a humidity level of just 35 percent is a suicidal 143 heat index. And the humidity level in the South is rarely that low except in winter.
>6 months to end the war before Europe freezes
Do people actually believe this? The frick?
You should really reconsider your sources of information. Perhaps start excluding moronic russian propaganda and sensationalistic article titles
t. western europoor
Just because you can turn your thermostat on doesn't mean your economy isn't fricked come December. Doesn't take a vatnik to see it.
Anyway, what happens come December?
Ports, shipping, and precision manufacturing all shit the bed. At a time when Germany is supposed to be re-arming itself.
Nothing really. Poland opens new pipe to Norway in September and can pump gas to Germany through existing connections.
except all the gas poland can theoretically get until q4 2023. barely covers internal demand. there's nothing to export.
>pump gas through existing connections
Norway provides 1% of global LNG output. Russia provides 24%.
Then make the apropriate argument.
"Your economy will be in a recession as chemical and hi-tech industries struggle without gas" is a very different argument from "Europe will freeze".
not him but it sounds truer when it's short, comon' that's like propaganda 101
>Do people actually believe this? The frick?
>You should really reconsider your sources of information. Perhaps start excluding moronic russian propaganda and sensationalistic article titles
>t. western europoor
This, Europe will be fine this winter without Russua, just watch.Like all other Russian boasts and threats they grissly exadgerate the effect if Russias biggest energy customers shopping elsewhere. Germany has already cut its use of Russian gas by 2/3s by this winter the use of Russian oil, gas or coal in the EU will be marginal, irrelevent and effect nothing much. Russia is never getting its best customers back. Winning charlie sgeen/putin style they've got all the hiv.
Its a simple heat and energy balance you frick tards. Explain to me where Germany and the EU are going to get 30-40% of their energy demands? When in reality they probably use 60-70% over the winter on a year basis.
It took Germany 10-15 years to slap together all that shit solar and renewable and they're still not reliable. So I'd really like to hear how they're going to replace gas in six months?
Shall they turn on coal boilers or nuclear plants? The ones they shut down and fired everyone from 10-15 years ago? Who will operate it?
People overestimate how much Russian gas Europe is buying. It's almost gone, and deposits are being filled to prepare for winter.
Frick you Germany with its 200 iq galaxy brain didn't build any LNG terminals
>Germany with its 200 iq galaxy brain
post proofs of high german iq
bump
forgot picture
I kneel
:>
i can understand protesting fossil fuels, but who the frick would protest wind power?
Its because wind turbines generates a magnetic field
That's fricking dumb. I figured it would be because of all the non-recyclable waste they generate, or maybe the noise. We literally live in a massive magnetic field.
Go drive out west and try to enjoy a view without seeing one of those giant fricking fidget spinners.
It puts a smile on my face seeing the wheels of industry turn.
That's not industry; that's corruption. Industry generally has to operate at a profit, without subsidies and kickbacks.
Renewable energy is more profitable than fossil fuels. Most coal and gas companies operating right now would not exist without government subsidies, often funded by taxing renewables.
Once the start up costs are covered fossil fuels simply cannot compete with the more efficient running and lack of ongoing fuel costs that renewable offer, which is why governments tax them to keep thier coal and gas industry donors competitive
If you've ever wondered why you get charged by the power company to use your own damn solar panels, now you know.
>Muh view
What a woman argument
They look fricking hype as shit. Do you not enjoy the sight of industry and progress?
boomers..
environmentalists seethe because the turbines genocide local bird life in a significant way
Not true. That's based upon the brain diarrhea from a lying shitsack, and one wind turbine field in California using out-dated windmills in a migratory bird throughway, that have since been dismantled and replaced. More than a decade ago.
It actually is true. It is massively exaggerated, but it does kill off a lot of bird life. The real problem is the blades they use. They are fabricated from a fiberglass material, once the blades reach their life span and are decommissioned they are tossed off into a landfill/buried. They can be "recycled", but it is absurdly expensive and not wide scale, so most of the time it's not even bothered with.
Pic also related.
I wish people were way more informed on their information in regards to this. In my opinion the best solution is hydro / nuclear.
Hydro has massive ramifications on water supply and needs extensive planning, even more-so than Nuclear, and could be reasonably replaced with "more nuclear" or cleaner gas
see: China's water woes
Nuclear is the superior option to all others, but, as usual, the military fricks everything up. The nuclear authority does not allow funding (functionally) for nuclear plants that don't create weapons-grade fissile material. As it stands, the nuclear power industry is just a front for our nuclear weapons development budget, and I really wish it wasn't.
In the long term, hydro only has value as a form of physical battery complementing solar/nuclear.
Better use liquified air in deep salt caverns or H2 to store energy, leave the surface for food or conservation of nature habitats.
H2 has the added benefit that it can be used for trains, cars and all kinds of agricultural machines.
Fine, but that's in the very, very long-term.
True. However, H2 from renewable energy will replace LNG/natgas in the next 10 years.
Buy Linde stock, they will be the ones controlling the spice, so to speak 😉
Check this list of already running projects with H2 in northern Germany:
https://www.ihk-nord.de/produktmarken/schwerpunkte/energiepolitik-industriepolitik/wasserstoff-landkarte-2020-4946362
I bought some in 2018 at 139€.
>one wind turbine field in California using out-dated windmills in a migratory bird throughway
All of them are in bird thoroughfares.
Birds tend to fly with the wind.
Painting them greatly reduces the number of bird impacts. At that point, it's basically natural selection.
Pollution kills hundreds of times more birds every year, stop regurgitating shell propaganda
eyes sores + bat killers
Smart people. Wind is fine if you want small scale shit, but it's really only viable in Kansas and is otherwise an eyesore, a danger, and a wildlife killer. And now for those that don't know here's some of them exploding https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vrT1t7uK1fs
:'>
they'll deliver it on trucks or trains then, plenty of time until winter
They are building 3-4 right now and i believe also getting more gas from norway. Middle east are reconstructing their infrastructure as well. Polish and South Korean presidents together with representatives of energy companies met during NATO summit and signed 60 billion dolar contract for nuclear power plants. Czech also signed some contract with Koreans. First couple of years energy will be a bit more expensive, meaning it will reflect on national debt, after that this region is gucci.
Uh, the LNG plant in the US exploded it's down for months. So now you're talking about getting the exploded plant back up and producing 6x its previous deliveries? Not possible. Chemical plants have a set rate and they can't just make more without capital investment.
>the LNG plant
> "THE"
(You) fricking mongoloid. The United States is not Scotland oblast.
https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/us-lng-exports-fall-lowest-since-feb-after-freeport-explosion-data-2022-07-01/
~11% temporary reduction, 2nd largest LNG plant in the U.S.
Also a relevant read:
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Why-Chinese-Imports-Of-US-LNG-Collapsed.html
~24% of total global sales, now available for the EU
Russia is over.
More like Russia has 6 months to end the war before Europe freezes. Bring on the winter war
>before Europe freezes
Only vatBlack person morons actually believe this.
>Climate is much more important to politicians than humans
>the biggest threat to the survival of humanity as a species is more important than single humans
Well, duh.
Two more weeks before whole EU freezes
the glaciers are flowing
Holy cope Batman.
All the explosive collars went off
qrd?
>FIRMS
cuck
High temperatures + no rains combo increase chances of fires
This is your daily reminder that Nuclear power is the only viable option for future energy production.
Take the nukepill
I long to live in a country with 30 dollar power bills and mushroom towers dotting the skyline. Electrified trains running everywhere.
>On December 22, 2021, PEJ announced the preferred location for Poland's first commercial nuclear power plan
We get the massege mate
Why are the french so pro nuclear and the germans so anti nuclear?
Superior forward thinking? Green movement were seen as anti-french? Germans are more autistic than once thought?
>Germans are more autistic than once thought?
This probably tbh
A lot of left wing nuclear opposition is literally the result of decades of KGB propaganda trying to destabilise their geopolitical rivals attempts from developing their nuclear bomb programs. Germany, alongside the Anglosphere countries got hit particularly hard in that regard.
This
Muh Chernobyl(moronation of party officials) and Fukushima(tsunami)
I remember when normies on Facebook said that radiation from Fukushima was going to kill all life in the Pacific Ocean.
I really fricking hate the chernobyl/fukushima scare even my mom and dad weren't immune to it. I had to spend literally days teaching them how they fricking work and the actual risks, not the oil industries propaganda.
A large percentage of Germany experienced the descent of the fallout from Chernobyl. Even to this very day, it is dangerous to eat certain plants and wildlife in Bavaria that are still contaminated with radioactive waste.
>Even to this very day, it is dangerous to eat certain plants and wildlife in Bavaria that are still contaminated with radioactive waste.
complete bullshit
No, you still shouldn't eat large amounts of boar meat or wild mushrooms. Eating it every once in a while is fine, but you shouldn't make it a central part of your diet.
Refer to:
https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/three-decades-german-mushrooms-still-show-imprint-chernobyl-2021-10-08/
This is from 2010: https://phys.org/news/2010-08-radioactive-boars-germany.html
From 2015: https://www.enca.com/life/travel/wild-boar-bavaria-show-high-levels-radioactivity
From 2022: https://newsrnd.com/news/2022-01-20-hunter-measures-alarmingly-high-radioactive-contamination-in-wild-boar-in-bavaria---green-politicians-warn-of-danger.rJboK0-wpY.html
>In the months following the deposition of radiocesium from the Chernobyl fallout, levels ranging from a few becquerels of Cesium 137 per kilogram to several thousand becquerels per kilogram were measured in wild boar meat in Germany.
>In 2020, the range of Cs 137 contamination in wild boar is still as wide, and maximum levels in some regions are higher today than in 1986.
>One phenomenon is of particular importance: the large differences in radiation levels in wild boar occur not only between different regions in Germany, but also in areas more highly contaminated by Chernobyl fallout.
>For example, it is also possible to have 2020 samples of wild boar from the same hunting ground simultaneously below 100 Bq Cs 137 per kg but also of several thousand Bq/kg. In addition, large seasonal variations in contamination can also occur in an area.
Wow! A THOUSAND Becquerels?
A THOUSAND becquerels of Cs137???? That's terrible! That could account for about... Uhh... An extra 0.5% of your yearly natural radiation dose! That's almost HALF of what you'd get from taking a transatlantic flight!
It varies between a thousand and SEVERAL thousand anon. 3,700 Bq per kilogram of meat is a large number and consequently considered to be dangerous. Several of Bavaria's boars feature values higher than that.
>3,700 Bq per
> one kilogram porkburger
Worth it. So fricking worth it.
I bet you don't know what any of those numbers mean or imply but you just decided it's dangerous because some green kartoffel b***h told you it is.
I pray that when intelligent life visits our planet, they don't assume Germans are representative for the rest of humanity. Because they would vaporize our planet the if they did.
french found out in like 60s that they don't have shit in france for resources so they deployed mass nukes in like 15 years because uranium is not only easy to get from various sources but mainly lasts forever as a fuel (people don't even realize that you only refuel a nuke plant like 5 a year and a nuke ship often doesn't even need refuel across its whole lifecycle) and were green ever since.
germans are germans. when they decide on something the go full moronic and they will never accept they did a mistake and just double down. they always had plenty of coal so they were never pressured into finding an alternative, after chernobyl germans decided nuclear is the devil so since then it just had to go. then they insisted renewable = good so they started massive deployement solar and wind since 2000s. those can't work without gas or hydro though so you end up moronic country that claims we need to do anything with co2 while shutting down nukes and increasing coal now because any other way would require them to admit they did a mistake and german's just don't do that.
once every 5 years*
Nuclear energy is cheaper if you need nuclear weapons anyway.
You have infrastructure for processing and refining Uranium anyway.
You can use your reactors to make plutonium and you can use your old decayed warheads for reactor fuel.
You know jack shit about german politics. All you do is reiterate memes you've seen on some asian basket fricking plaza.
Germany has had a long standing anti-nuclear movement consisting of all kinds of greens as well as some esoteric spastics plus a considerable amount of people that were directly influenced by the Tshernobyl disaster. With Fukushima these movements gained momentum and finally it was decided to stop nuclear energy production. However the majority of anti-nuclear proponents assumed that you would go full renewable instead. German politicians in power at the time were (are) very much influenced by the fossil fuel industry and so they used this momentum to put more money into these sectors. If you ask me the extend to which this happened was just corruption and many politicians of the then ruling party have been proven to be corrupt too so take that as you like. And now we are in a perverse limbo of contracts with fossil energy suppliers that can't be cancelled until decades in the future, esoteric spastics believing windmills are evil, greens that "wanna preserve rare species and nature" and average joes not wanting windmills in their back yard all blocking construction of these renewables and necessary infrastructure.
In hindsight it was obviously a mistake to stop nuclear in favour of coal but the people that wanted it stopped were outplayed by corrupt politicians and reinvesting into new nuclear plants wouldn't even change anything now (as construction takes years), wouldn't be cheaper and quiet literally be a step back if you assume that renewables are the end goal.
TL:DR Germans get outplayed by their corrupt politicians and now it just makes no sense to go back
>In hindsight it was obviously a mistake to stop nuclear in favour of coal but the people that wanted it stopped were outplayed by corrupt politicians and reinvesting into new nuclear plants wouldn't even change anything now (as construction takes years), wouldn't be cheaper and quiet literally be a step back if you assume that renewables are the end goal.
whether you're german or not, this is exactly the german mentality i talked about. it isn't "hindsight". it's just arrogance that results in complete denial of reality. despite wanting to do ""everything" to decrease emmisions, they decided and worse, insist on moving from nuclear before coal and gas. they completely ignore reality where nuclear is the cleanest source (together with wind, except nuclear is clean 24/7 while wind is clean when it blows with the capacity being like ~30 maybe 40%. solar is more dirty and in germany the capacity factor is atrocious getting as low as like 15-20%.). they also ignore the reality where despite repeating renewables are cheap and nuclear is expensive, germany has the 2nd most expensive electricity in europe (after denmark, unsurprisingly another country dependent on wind).
the "nuclear takes too long to build, it's too late now" has been repeated for the past 20 years and i don't doubt it will still be the excuse in the next 50 years. yes, nuclear is expensive upfront but cheapest in the long run. the think is, again, germoney spend pumping unbelievable amount of money into renewables and keeps doing so that it's moronic excuse.
after 20+ years of germoney repeating this crap while doubling down on renewables, they have most expensive electricity, complete depence on russian gas ( "it's mostly for heating" yeah if only you invested in switching to heat pumps, naturally germany didn't do that) and emmision wise, the ultimate goal, there are about average (compared to france that has completely clean grid for past 50 years).
You completely ignore everything I said further proving that you are just a moron and to top it of you are spouting disproven phallacies.
Again, it was a movement of morons, historically scarred people and opportunistic greens that wanted more renewables. Doesn't matter that it would've been smarter to kill coal first because there was no way that would ever happen anyway. Industry influence on politics from nuclear wasn't very strong but fossil has a huge lobby. Conservative german politicians sold out to this lobby and that is the reason for this clusterfrick.
And nuclear is only cheap if you ignore the cost of waste storage/recycling which is a problem that isn't even close to getting solved.
The main problem in Germany right now is building the windmills and solar panels. Similarily to how nuclear would be cucked by bureocracy if you wanted to rebuilt capacities, renewables get cucked by bureocracy. (see
) Germany killed parts of its renewable energy sector and many of those firms are working for foreign customers now because there is no way to legally build much more in Germany at the moment.
Also the original plan was to use gas for base load if I am not mistaken lol
If you wanna talk theoretical technologies Germany is much more likely gonna be looking at H2 for energy storage. That shit has become quiet efficient in recent years and they have basically infinite supply of water.
>However the majority of anti-nuclear proponents assumed that you would go full renewable instead.
It is almost like there are nobody there that have any idea about engineering or power grids.
> new nuclear plants wouldn't even change anything now (as construction takes years)
Not really. You could have a new plant up and running under a year after the zoning is cleared and construction begins if you cut back on excessive red tape, regulation and certificates. A lot which have been lobbied in by said fossil fuel barons and green morons as one way to gimp nuclear by its knees by making each plant snail paced to be built and operational. Also massively increases costs which helps a lot in marketing and lobbying the gullible.
The number one problem with so called "renewables" like wind and solar is stability. When is the wind blowing, when is the sun shining. Spread across the year a solar panel has only five hourse per day per year that it does effective work. That is 5/24h. Does that sound efficient to you? Wind, aside from the noise also wrecks havoc on wild life, litters the landscape and disposal of old wind turbines is similar to disposing nuclear waste. As in they need to be buried in concrete cases due to the fiberglass not ending up in the water circulation and in your bloodstream.
From non nuclear greenies only hydro and geothermo are decent yet very limited due to geography. Solar is only viable in orbit where it has 24/7 eyesight with the sun and thus has a decently constant power output. Wind is a complete meme through and through.
If fusion every becomes a thing all signs are pointing to it being a premium power source that will have x ratio of fusion:fission(nuclear). Simply due to several factors of complexity in its construction as well as material acquisition. A fission reactors innards are hotter then the suns core and thus need extremely power magnetic fields to levitate the hellish hot plasma. That aint cheap.
hydroplants are local enviromental disasters by themselves (and if we use stupid commies running a powerplant as a danger for western operation, i suggest you don't read about the several, mainly chinese, hydro plant failures. those disasters make chernobyl look like stumbling your toe).
the problem with greenies is that they think electricity comes from wall plug. which doesn't matter if they are irrelevant in politics decision making but in europe they are very relevant and especially in germany so here we are.
>the chinks build dams out of corncobs and egg cartons so all hydro dams are bad
Lol lmao
i'm not saying that. hydroplants are amazing but not every country is lucky to be norway to be able to generate and store electricity solely from them.
i'm pointing out that it's exact same logic why "nuclear bad" in west. chernobyl was a communism problem just as the hydro failures are a chink problem, neither are nuclear and hydro problems respectively.
>Not really. You could have a new plant up and running under a year after the zoning is cleared and construction begins if you cut back on excessive red tape, regulation and certificates
You definitely could not do this without brewing some spicy tap water and killing half the workers through 20-hour shifts. Fastest construction in the 21st century was 39 months in South Korea, but the global average is 190 months. Sure you can say the absolute best example is what we should do but this is always true, for everything, it doesn't map to reality. If you apply the same logic to renewables you'd be shitting them out faster than your milk goes bad.
>You could have a new plant up and running under a year after the zoning is cleared and construction begins if you cut back on excessive red tape, regulation and certificates.
and you could have every hospital fully funded and with beds to spare if you stopped doing surgery without anaesthetic, regulations on nuclear energy are not some nanny state overreaching it's wholly sensible precautions
>Wind, aside from the noise also wrecks havoc on wild life, litters the landscape and disposal of old wind turbines is similar to disposing nuclear waste. As in they need to be buried in concrete cases due to the fiberglass not ending up in the water circulation and in your bloodstream.
you're not supposed to build wind turbines close enough that you can hear them, the argument against them by locals is always "it looks ugly" despite property values not being changed by being near them
I don't know what you mean by litters the landscape
and you can't build a fricking coal plant out of recyclable materials either, the difference is one outputs pollution all through its service life before it's buried in a casket
>Wind is a complete meme through and through.
wind literally supplies 70% of all electricity in my country, if that's a meme then I'd hate to find out what gas is
as for fusion, you can't fricking run a country on "hopefully we'll have infinite clean power from a technological breakthrough soon"
>you're not supposed to build wind turbines close enough that you can hear them
Too bad Europe has zero depopulated wastelands to stick them in.
>wind literally supplies 70% of all electricity in my country
What does you country do when it's not windy where the turbines are?
do you not know you can have more than one wind farm
Does your country have a population density of 3/100 km^2? If you're trying to run wind farms as your base load your mains power engineers should all be shot, they're shit for that you'll need every square inch you can get.
>Solar only works in direct sunlight!
moron.jpg
Remind me, how many trillion euros did Germany spend on solar? Protip: the sun doesn't shine enough in Europe (other than remote parts of Spain) for large-scale solar to work. Nuclear reactors are the *only* viable alternative to fossil fuels for Germany, and the Greens got rid of them in favor of solar.
>It was Fukushima!
>Begins denuking in 01 under PM now on Gazprom board
Wow what a crazy coincidence and totally related to an event that happened almost a decade later
>Germans are more autistic than once thought?
There's a joke about a German having their driving license confiscated by the police
>Hey bro so like what if the police took your license but you still had to go somewhere would you still drive
>How could I drive if I don't have a license?
>I know it's like illegal yeah, but its important, you have to get there in ti-
>YOU CANNOT DRIVE A CAR WITHOUT A LICENSE
Why did the SBZ put up the Berlin Wall anyway? Just put up a traffic light placed permanently on red and no German would ever cross
It wasn't just the Germans that the USSR was worried about leaving. It was the 20 million vatniks they imported into East Germany they were trying to contain.
The French and KGB both used greens to poison the well.
>Why are the french so pro nuclear and the germans so anti nuclear?
Years of Chernobyl propaganda dispelled by Russian influences (who are interested in firmly positioning Germany on the gas dildopipe).
Pathetic. Europe should have embraced alternative energy long ago to prevent being Russia's hostage.
>Europe should have embraced alternative energy long ago to prevent being Russia's hostage
And before fully embracing it, they should've stick to the nuclear at all costs (probs also after bc why not).
Germany should have embraced nuclear energy.
OH WA-
I took so many nukepills i glow in the dark
Theres literally no reason NOT to use it
Well, the best option from a security standpoint is to have a healthy mix of power sources (with nuclear being the most common source)
Optimal is nuclear as the baseload and methane to finish off, plus hydro baseload until you run out of really good sources (which everybody has, by now).
Anyone that says otherwise is moronic or is looking to do harm. Literally those are the only options.
>First of all gas power plants have a different purpose than coal and nuclear plants for the grid. Those give you a baseline of required electricity while gas fills in temporary higher demand as they can be turned up and down much quicker.
That's partly true. Gas is well suited for peak loads, but it is often used to cover base loads or intermediate loads as well. And this would be essentially mandatory for Germany to lower emissions.
Meant as a response to
Absolutely. There was even some politicians trying to shill gas a means to carry baseline loads because it produced less CO2. But this board is so full of morons equating gas needs to electricity needs in general I had to correct that.
I agree, but I thought since most people on this board are Americans it bears pointing out, because to my understanding the US grid often uses natural gas for base or intermediate load. I would also like to point out that while you can't easily just swap heating for homes and industrial processes away from gas, people were warning Germany they were going to have a problem ten years ago, so they had every opportunity to plan ahead. So what you're saying is all correct, but to be clear it also doesn't excuse Germany for putting themselves in this situation.
Nothing excuses Germany's moronation. Their russian appeasement politics read like pre-ww2 Hitler appeasement. Energy politics and everything about it are royally cucked and in the hands of the industry which is just working into their own pockets. This entire country is fricked sideways but we are so wealthy that no one bothers to fix it. Yet the majority of posters here understand jack shit about it and post their moronic opinions based on flawed assumptions so that an actual valuable discussion never takes place.
Don't forget that most Russian production of military equipment beyond small arms is highly dependent upon Siemens and their heavy machine tools, particularly CNC.
Siemens stopped supplying and supporting.
Their automated factory line production is officially on suicide watch.
>t. PLC programmer
Russians now starving for German Siemen
goddamit, get the frick out
Yo, Carlos come on man.
>no automated factories because no German parts
>no manual factories because vatniks are too cheap to pay wages
>when workers striked, the vatniks started screeching about how nobody expected any damn wages during the Great Patriotic War
> Using FIRMS instead of an OPIR layer in THRESHER
Fricking normies
And yet, (You) didn't. hmmmm.
>Get info from high side
>Poast on 4chin
>Get v&
Sounds like a plan
t. Chelsea Manning
>> Using FIRMS instead of an OPIR layer in THRESHER
Unbefrickinglievable. If there's one thing I can't stand it's fricking using FIRMS instead of an OPIR layer in THRESHER.
>an OPIR layer in THRESHER
Tell me about an OPIR layer in THRESHER. Why should an OPIR layer in THRESHER be used instead of FIRMS? Is an OPIR layer in THRESHER really that much better?
> Is an OPIR layer in THRESHER really that much better?
In comparison to FIRMS? You bet. It's basically how to use THRESHER if you don't prefer it with OPIR.
Put simply, the instrumental affordances vis-a-vis OPIR and FIRMS necessitate all manner of reflexivities, albeit juxtaposed both within *and* upon THRESHER.
I'm ashamed of sharing a planet, let alone a continent, with Germans.
This is 100% a gas war. Putin is trying desperately to secure his oligarchs’ export market with Europe with Germany being the largest customer. The big gas deposits found in eastern Ukraine about 10 years ago started all this. The West saw a chance to cut out Russia from the gas export market as all the export facilities reside in Ukraine. Putin absolutely couldn’t have that so he invaded shortly afterwards in 2014. The war successfully made Shell pull out of a big gas deal due to proximity. Gas was still flowing so the West just shoved their thumbs in its mouth as usual. Nordstream 2 was Russia’s play to secure their gas sales to Europe via Germany — the West refused to let them have it, killing it late last year. A few months later, Putin invades again. Trying to regime-change Ukraine and secure gas sales.
Russia is a tin pot oil state there to enrich a small handful of energy oligarchs. It’s their fault. But Germany has certainly been enabling it.
Ukes are probably lighting the front up all down the line to help keep the Russians pinned while they pull out from Lysychansk.
small dots might be local fires caused by rocket artillery
I clicked on a thread about FIRMS showing some serious shenanigans afoot, and I wound up reading genuinely interesting bants about Euro energy autism
Seriously one of the most enjoyable forum slides I've ever seen, 8/8, lads.
people are saying this war turned the board into a bunch of irrelevant bullshit but it's teaching me so much about other random salient things i can't help but be a little thankful
Keep tuning in. /k/ will teach you one fact a week that you will find fascinating and necessary that you never knew you wanted to know until you read it here.
Weapons board = people who deal with reality.
As for the energy problem Germany is facing, it is a problem and it will be close. However, using it as a weapon will not really work. Germany is willed to take it on the chin and so is the rest of Europe, as can be seen in the last two rounds of sanctions.
Consider the picture. The faint line is the average reserve 2019 to 2021. The thick blue line is the reserves right now. The orange dots is where the reserves have to be to make it trough the winter. The first orange dot is the 1st Oct, the second 1st Nov.
What is done right now to make it to the orange reserves? We will use a little bit more of oil, coal, nuclear, solar and wind, where possible. Also we will import more energy from our Neighbors where possible. A new LNG terminal is built to faster import natgas from alternative sources. Key industry reduced it's natgas consumption and may, depending on the reserves, be shut down.
A law will be introduced that allows landlords to turn the minimal temp for shared natgas heating from now 21°C to 18°C.
Linde, largest source of natgas and other industry gases in Germany, got a few billions to build H2 infrastructure to replace natgas with H2. This is a recent development and will bear fruit in two to three years when the first natgas plants get switched to H2. It's a question of scale now, not feasibility.
Teach me about life, /k/. I am an empty vessel.
The FuRK (Funny Republic of Kekistan) is that way.
The idea is to be amongst the first industry nations that get away from CO2.
Another interesting pic.
As can be seen in the light blue line, the Jamal-pipeline dried up shortly after the war.
Both, Nordstream1 (Orange) and Megal-pipeline have been lower output than usual.
It also should be noted that other countries in Europe have similar problems and it's expected that we will not make it to the 80% to 90% reserves. More industry will likely be shut down. The industry itself is hastily triening to switch to other sources such as H2, which isn't yet available in large enough amounts.
Tldr; Germans have to wear a pullover this winter and some Industry will shut down, but they will take it on the chin. In the long term Russia is hurting itself more than it does Europe.
Yeah. The energy card was one of the few Russia had against Europe but using it in such a blatant way will absolutely slap Moscow back in the face, now no one will argue that dependence on Russia isn't a danger since Putin has shown it's a weapon he WILL use against them (he also kindly reminded everyone that Russia sure as hell isn't a reasonable trade partner). They have no choice but to invest heavily into diversification for long-term safety.
It's another case of Monke shooting himself in the foot.
I'm just waiting for the news conference where Putin tells the EU "Buy our petroenergy or Russia will nuke you." Effectively, he's already said that in so many words.
>Buy our petroenergy or Russia will nuke you.
"no, we're good thanks"
The worst part is Russia has been cutting off gas even to paying customers that bend over backwards for them.
Because what they really needed right now is to show everyone that playing nice with them really doesn't work.
>jamal pipeline
I thought this was a Black person joke but then I looked at the image and thats actually its name. Where'd it come from?
Some slav village probably.
Source is NDR and the graphs get updated every business day:
https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/info/Gasspeicher-in-Deutschland-So-steht-es-um-die-Fuellstaende,gasspeicher120.html
Energy politics, man. Energy politics.
Thanks anon
Cheers.
>You can never run a grid completely on non-nuclear renewables.
You can, but the investment is huge.
Just as the investment in the existing infrastructure was huge. The nation that finishes it first will be more or less energy independent. Since this is a generational task, just as building existing grids was generational, most nations fail to get started.
Germany is at the forefront of switching to H2 and after that to Fusion (google the Wendelstein X-7 experiment and their involvement with ITER). Natgas was supposed to be a bridge to H2 which will be the bridge to Fusion, now it seems that bridge will be pricier than expected, as we have to import pricey LNG. However, it has only accelerated the larger scale deployment for H2.
In the future (say 50 to 100 years) there is no need to get oil from the ground. We will make our own gasoline and kerosine and all kinds of oils and lubricants from Co2 in the air. Picrel is a site where electricity is used to create Kerosine for air industry. This needs to be scaled up once we have surplus energy.
Again, it's a project on a generational scale, as was the build of the existing grids.
I heard it was the Bilderbergs and the Joos.
Forgot the sourcerino, sorry:
https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/technologie/synthetisches-kerosin-emsland-atmosfair-lufthansa-101.html
>You can, but the investment is huge.
And also completely reliant on your country's geography. If you don't have enough rivers good for hydro, or accessible geothermal, you're fricked.
That is objectively wrong. It's alsmost as if you form a sentence that starts with but, then you stop thinking, and then you tell the world your water tight argument.
Even Sweden has enough area for wind and enough area for solar, the problem is we need to get the energy to the H2 production site to make H2 and store it.
At night you burn the H2 from your reserve, just like oil, coal or natgas. Or you use the H2 to make gasoline or natgas from CO2 in the air.
Or you use the energy to fill salt caverns with liquified air which you then use to run a turbine.
Again, it's a new infrastructure as pricey as the infrastructure for oil, coal and natgas and you have to build it.
I doubt you are able to fathom this at all, the quality of your contribution is really low. I recommend to just keep your thoughts to yourself. >:^)
as far as I can tell, CO2 capture is still a rather bad technology, unless people figure out plant-like carbon fixation.
>enough area for wind and enough area for solar,
Wind and solar are unreliable dogshit entirely controlled by the benevolence of the atmosphere. Any plan that makes them the crux of a nation's power generation capabilities is a ploy to sell capacitors to gullible government departments.
If you had read more than what you wanted to, you would have read the solution to it's unreliability in this thread.
But you didn't because you like to stop thinking after the first "but".
>enough area for solar
bro do you know how little northern europe gets sunlight?
Building a solar roof on every commercial building and parking lot would suffice.
>Building a solar roof on every commercial building
That's an actual EU policy iirc, coming in the next few years. It's important to start building solar panels in the West though.
im completely OK with this. The building is there, and ugly. cladding it with solar panels is only a win-win
Think of how much nicer parking lots will be with a high airy roof of panels mounted to pergola like frames will be.
You bet. We could be kings.
Enough light for solar panels to work
Could the yield be higher in the Sahara desert? Yes.
Is it still enough, even in winter, if complemented with wind and energy storage? Yes.
Can you even into science?
>using it as a weapon will not really work
especially since you can only do it once and doing it even once is just going to sink your economy. Germany can always ration industrial use and keep people somewhat warm and somewhat happy for a winter. Russia cannot pull the same shit again, they're already losing access to the market.
What's going on with sulphur dioxide in the last three days?
looks like a sensor error, noise filtration failing
Russia is a backward nation entirely dependent on fossil fuels.
We go alternate, Russia is FRICKED.
If by alternative you mean just go all-in with nuclear and supplement with fossil fuels where needed like non-silly-people, then yes, anon.
Vatnigs getting blasted
I cum