General > General Technical Chat
"Gas Armageddon": Energy/electricity prices in EU/UK (and how to deal with them)
<< < (116/139) > >>
SilverSolder:

--- Quote from: Siwastaja on September 13, 2022, 02:57:10 pm ---
--- Quote from: wraper on September 13, 2022, 10:33:22 am ---I would not call it extra EUR 100.

--- End quote ---

Yet, it might end up being not much more than that. We are getting scaremongered and seeing scaring signs, yet:

* If food price increase is really just about inflation, as it is called by media, and not stagflation, wages will follow. Even though it is more expensive in EUR, it's not more expensive in real price. Of course, there is a delay, which is also why hyperinflation is an actual problem, but no one knows if we are gonna see that.

* Huge energy price peak will likely remain a short peak, a panic reaction of the market, plus then the "new normal" where the era of ridiculously under priced fossil energy is over, good riddance. For example, electric energy price to the consumers went here from 0.05EUR/kWh to 0.40EUR/kWh or so, but the companies secured futures for ~0.30EUR/kWh for the winter, and get this: back to ~0.15EUR/kWh for the spring. So consumer prices will more or less follow.

And now that we have more motivation than ever to solve the energy problem, solutions will be seen. There are so many obvious low-hanging fruits to pick, just limited by the fact no one wanted to invest even 1000EUR to any energy upgrade because of ridiculously cheap gas.

I kinda like role playing this survivalist game, but to be frank: I believe tszaboo will be much closer to what will actually happen, than the... collapsists. Boring, I know.

--- End quote ---

In international relations, friends come and friends go (remember, "we don't have permanent friends, only permanent interests").

So, if you think really far down the road (10 years?  20 years?)  who's to say there isn't a new, very modernising leader in Russia and that the whole problem has disappeared?
Siwastaja:

--- Quote from: langwadt on September 13, 2022, 12:08:13 pm ---is the current situation really much worse than the oil crisis and recession of the early 70's and 80's ?

--- End quote ---

Likely not at all. We have just forgotten it, so we feel like the current crisis is something much more serious. The oil crisis kinda resolved almost too quickly, so while good progress was made (for example: thermal energy storage implemented, my house has this too, from 1982), all that went out of fad for cheap energy again.
Siwastaja:

--- Quote from: SilverSolder on September 13, 2022, 03:02:29 pm ---So, if you think really far down the road (10 years?  20 years?)  who's to say there isn't a new, very modernising leader in Russia and that the whole problem has disappeared?

--- End quote ---

I truly think that in 10-20 years we need significantly less fossil fuels. If you look at Germany's progress for example, it has been exceptionally good - just not good enough, not in time for this particular crisis. But they are clearly halfway there, you can easily confirm that, and in just 10 years they have easily doubled the wind, quadrupled PV, implemented heatpumps in trivial estates, and have some actually viable/scalable pilot projects in energy storage.

It's worth noting you don't need to completely stop fossil fuel use, even just halving it will basically solve the political volatility problem and significantly ease the climate thing. Having the asset of burning some fossils significantly helps with the most difficult part, longer term (weeks, months) energy storage. What about calm, cold winter weeks with little wind and solar? Just burn fossils, you can well afford that if it's just a few weeks a year.

Using Germany as an example, they decided to replace both fossil and nuclear by renewables, which is a good target, but did that in the wrong order (in a hindsight).
Marco:

--- Quote from: SilverSolder on September 13, 2022, 02:58:55 pm ---Appeasement is wrong, and resorting to violence as the first response is also wrong.  Life (and relations) isn't black and white...  which is what cool heads know, and the extremes never get, being so excitable.

--- End quote ---

The difference between being noncommittal and taking a position is black and white.

Don't give weapons and support to Ukraine? It would have almost certainly caused their quick demise after which NATO and Russia would have moved on to the Baltics. NATO would probably have been forced to station nuclear weapons in the Baltics to show their absolute commitment to its defense and that would have truly brought the world to the brink of nuclear war.

That's why it's appeasement and dangerous.
JohanH:

--- Quote from: Siwastaja on September 13, 2022, 03:13:22 pm ---It's worth noting you don't need to completely stop fossil fuel use, even just halving it will basically solve the political volatility problem and significantly ease the climate thing. Having the asset of burning some fossils significantly helps with the most difficult part, longer term (weeks, months) energy storage. What about calm, cold winter weeks with little wind and solar? Just burn fossils, you can well afford that if it's just a few weeks a year.

--- End quote ---

Exactly. And rather than each car and each house having their own inefficient oil and gas burner, it makes sense to do this in big industrial stoves and turbines with high efficiency and exhaust cleaning, both creating electricity and distributing the heat.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod