Author Topic: Renewable energy propaganda vs real life  (Read 493 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DimitriP

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1052
  • Country: us
  • "Best practices" are best not practiced.© Dimitri
Renewable energy propaganda vs real life
« on: September 30, 2019, 12:48:51 am »
I accedentally heard that "germany gets 100% of it's energy from renewables".

Ok it was Bill Maher that said it with the former EPA lady Gina McCarthy nodding appropriately as seen here:
at 2:26



My gut told me to "go look it up".
Then, on purpose I found out two things:

A) Germany's  power from "renewables" is at best less than 50%  ( https://www.dw.com/en/german-renewables-deliver-more-electricity-than-coal-and-nuclear-power-for-the-first-time/a-49606644   ) 
and
 B)  prices are going up up up
( https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-energy-retail/german-consumers-paying-record-prices-for-power-portal-idUSKCN1P9233 )

So what's really going on in Germany?

Have electricity prices gone up reaching "record highs" as the reuters article describes?
What % of Germany's consumed energey is from "renewables"?
Was Bill Mahers' statement nothing more than a sort of "flamboyant exaggeration" / "poetic license statistic" and if that were true why is  Gina MCCarthy nodding ?

I don't mind being lied to, as long as I don't have a reason to doubt it!




   If three 100  Ohm resistors are connected in parallel, and in series with a 200 Ohm resistor, how many resistors do you have? 
 

Offline tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16174
  • Country: nz
  • Taupaki Technologies Ltd. NZ Siglent Distributor
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: Renewable energy propaganda vs real life
« Reply #1 on: September 30, 2019, 12:58:51 am »
« Last Edit: September 30, 2019, 01:04:22 am by tautech »
Avid Rabid Hobbyist
 

Offline coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4704
  • Country: gb
Re: Renewable energy propaganda vs real life
« Reply #2 on: September 30, 2019, 02:17:55 am »
I accedentally heard that "germany gets 100% of it's energy from renewables".
This is one of the most annoying things when people talk about percentages of renewable energy. Obviously Germany doesn't get 100% of its energy from renewables. One obvious factor is we all know they have a high percentage of gasoline and diesel powered transportation. All that people are usually talking about when they say renewable energy is renewable electrical energy, and they ignore everything else. In many countries the percentage of non-electrical energy is huge. Until people start focussing on the total energy consumption we won't get very far with understanding the true scale of the problems in moving to all renewable energy. Besides that, Germany is nowhere near achieving 100% renewably sourced electrical energy. In some areas they are actually going backwards with their carbon footprint, as they run away from nuclear power.
 

Offline Someone

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2126
  • Country: au
Re: Renewable energy propaganda vs real life
« Reply #3 on: September 30, 2019, 07:27:58 am »
Its likely a researcher condensing the situation to little "bytes" that the presenter then mis-interpreted, while there is enough installed renewable generation in Germany to run 100% green:
https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/renewables-cover-about-100-german-power-use-first-time-ever
It happens very rarely at the moment and with the import/export complexities the "green" part could have been traded to who knows where (including trading to other times when the renewables weren't generating). The person being interviewed should really have corrected that in the interview.
 

Online NANDBlog

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4464
  • Country: nl
Re: Renewable energy propaganda vs real life
« Reply #4 on: September 30, 2019, 07:57:45 am »
Especially annoying, that they could very well just not lie. They could say that 99% of mainland Norway electricity production is renewable.
It is hydro, which is "not that sexy". And you need oil to fund it.
Ah well, lets just be ignorant until we boil the oceans.
 

Offline DimitriP

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1052
  • Country: us
  • "Best practices" are best not practiced.© Dimitri
Re: Renewable energy propaganda vs real life
« Reply #5 on: September 30, 2019, 08:39:25 am »
Its likely a researcher condensing the situation to little "bytes" that the presenter then mis-interpreted, while there is enough installed renewable generation in Germany to run 100% green:
https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/renewables-cover-about-100-german-power-use-first-time-ever
It happens very rarely at the moment and with the import/export complexities the "green" part could have been traded to who knows where (including trading to other times when the renewables weren't generating). The person being interviewed should really have corrected that in the interview.

Hmmm...sounds like those "new elements" they keep adding to the periodic table https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/01/04/461904077/4-new-elements-are-added-to-the-periodic-table

Quote
The new elements' existence was confirmed by further experiments that reproduced them — however briefly. Element 113, for instance, exists for less than a thousandth of a second."
   If three 100  Ohm resistors are connected in parallel, and in series with a 200 Ohm resistor, how many resistors do you have? 
 
The following users thanked this post: Someone

Offline SparkyFX

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 524
  • Country: de
Re: Renewable energy propaganda vs real life
« Reply #6 on: September 30, 2019, 03:00:32 pm »
He probably mixed up Norway (mostly Hydro, population: 5.3 milion) and Germany (Wind and Solar, population: 83 million).

It is true that electricity costs more in Germany, but this comes from a situation where local coal mining was subsidized 1985-1995 by 8,25% on the electricity bill on average in former West Germany... to keep coal mining "competitive".

The feed-in by renewables was and still is subsidized, it went down significant (e.g. solar) in recent years and recent changes provide yearly degradation of feed-in compensation based on type of renewable.

I however would not agree that a journalist mixing up facts should lead to abandoning the idea itself as propagandistic rubbish or would change the forming of opinions as drastically as proposed. It is pretty much foul play to go ad hominem, instead of the facts themselves - until someone continously spreads misinformation of course.

'Green' propaganda, it's everywhere !  ::)

Some latest findings:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/energy/windpower/9889882/Wind-farms-will-create-more-carbon-dioxide-say-scientists.html
Yeah, on peat soil if you remove the peat to build one. You know that peat was used as coal substitute for heating not too long ago by burning it (therefore releasing its Carbon content)? This is the kind of nonsense news no one needed, the comparison is on par with the question if rotors from windfarms kill more birds than the domesticated cat.
Support your local planet.
 
The following users thanked this post: Hiemal

Offline DimitriP

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1052
  • Country: us
  • "Best practices" are best not practiced.© Dimitri
Re: Renewable energy propaganda vs real life
« Reply #7 on: September 30, 2019, 06:51:33 pm »
Quote
I however would not agree that a journalist mixing up facts should lead to abandoning the idea itself as propagandistic rubbish or would change the forming of opinions as drastically as proposed. It is pretty much foul play to go ad hominem, instead of the facts themselves - until someone continously spreads misinformation of course.

Propaganda being the "information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view", seems to fit here.

You find out about issues, that have existed for "a long time". Some companies or individuals or both, keep on going, producing untold wealth for themselves or their companies and then it seems when the markeat reaches some kind a plateau ....suddenly
"This is a realy bad thing an we all must stop doing it!".
Case in point.
A) Pollution in Los Angeles,
B) Cell phones and texting
C) Santa Clarita Valley / Los Angeles water shortages.

A) Beckman, (of Beckman Instustries fame) , was called in to measure pollution in Los Angeles in ---wait for it...1954. And yes the air was "bad".
The EPA was convenently established in 1970.

B) Cell phones. Started in late 80s..and once e v e r y o n e has one AT&T and Verizon start buying radio time toplay a public service announcement about not texting and driving,  interrupting the radio station program where if you are the 32nd caller you get a prize. Where are these callers calling in from, a payphone? No...they are calling from their car. I'm sure they all dial using hands free mode ...Riiiight

and My favorite
C) Los Angeles Water issues.
Saint Francis dam, (that faied misearlbly in 1928 - that's twenty eight of last century - was built to meed the deamnds of a growin population in Los Angeles - because there wasn't enough water. Fast forward to the present there are quite a few more people in "Los Angeles" and guess what...there is always a water shortage concern, while for the last 90 years a few individuals made mega millions building and building and building and building and building ...you get the idea.
My water shortage policy goes like this. I turn on the faucet and there is no water coming out, there is a water shortage. Until then I'll use as much water as I "need".

So no I will not play the game  of "we have financially exploited a situation up to the breaking point, now everyone needs to "help" heal the break".

Nope. Go get your own supreglue!

Time to go drive my gross polluter classified car around the block . C'ya

 

   If three 100  Ohm resistors are connected in parallel, and in series with a 200 Ohm resistor, how many resistors do you have? 
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf