No sun. No wind. Hello Germany, care to rethink your Green New Deal? 
A Huge Green Outage
Welt Business (translated from German, paywalled) reports Now Germany is experiencing a green electricity outage – with huge consequences
“The foggy weather of the last few days has brought green electricity production to a virtual standstill. Not only have particularly climate-damaging power plants been brought into operation as a replacement for wind and solar power, but prices have also exploded. And all of this seems to be just a foretaste of winter.”
Dark Doldrums
H/T @hendrikotten3 @JulienReszka @cristoforestman @MichaelAArouet @hagentc
The Green Old Scare
The common sense approach is to replace coal with nuclear and natural gas. Also, transition with hybrids instead of EV mandates.
Since we are decades behind on nuclear because of the “Green Old Scare”, the sensible option is to phase out coal for natural gas and then nuclear because of the lead times in building a nuclear plant.
Instead, Germany, with thanks to an idiotic decision dating to Chancellor Angela Merkel, chose to get rid of nuclear with no viable alternative.
When that failed, Germany had needed to import energy from France but also neighboring countries that produced energy with coal, and the dirtiest coal at that.
How stupid can you get?
Greens Trounced in Elections
Greens were hammered in the European Parliament elections, in French elections, and in three German state elections.
But did that change the policies of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyden?
Of course not!
Von Der Leyen Affirms Europe’s Leadership in Green Hydrogen Amid US Delays
Please note Von Der Leyen Affirms Europe’s Leadership in Green Hydrogen Amid US Delays
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, in her speech at the Fourth Edition of the Renewable Hydrogen Summit, outlined Europe’s significant strides and continued leadership in the renewable hydrogen sector, contrasting sharply with the slower pace of progress in the United States.
Addressing a virtual audience, von der Leyen highlighted that over the past year, Europe has finalized investment decisions on more than 2 gigawatts of renewable hydrogen projects—a substantial increase that quadruples the current installed capacity.
The REPowerEU plan aims to produce 10 million tons of renewable hydrogen by 2030, supported by legislative mandates that require significant portions of hydrogen used in industry and transport to be renewable by the end of the decade. These targets are not merely aspirational but are binding, with Member States required to incorporate them into national law by May 2025.
More Green New Idiocy
That’s more Green New Idiocy from Von der Leydon who arrogantly assumes votes don’t matter.
July 7: France is Now Ungovernable Following a Pyrrhic Victory for the Left-Green Alliance
France is Now Ungovernable
By refusing to cooperate with the Right, Macron instead has to cooperate with a Far Left plurality described above including Green policy that spawned the Yellow-Vest Protests that rocked Macron for months.
September 1: Far Right to Win First German State Election Since WWII
I am pleased to report the Greens crashed out in Thuringia, losing every seat.
In Saxony, the Greens managed 5.1 percent of the vote, barely meeting the 5.0 percent threshold, but lost 5 seats in parliament, dropping from 12 to 7.
September 22: SPD Barely Hangs On, Greens Crash in Brandenburg Germany State Election
In Brandenburg, the outgoing government narrowly lost its majority as the Greens collapsed and fell short of the 5% electoral threshold, losing all their seats.
It was nearly a total boot of the Greens in three state elections, but as they say, “two out of three ain’t bad.”
German Polls
Hoot of the Day
The ruling 3-way Traffic Light coalition is down to a combined 35 percent and FDP at 4.5 percent would be booted. So, call it 30 percent. Some coalition!
However, the only thing an election will do is shift the power from one very unstable coalition to another very unstable coalition.
The German Government Collapses, Chancellor Scholz Fired his Finance Minister
Please note my November 7 post, The German Government Collapses, Chancellor Scholz Fired his Finance Minister
The Traffic Light Coalition finally blew up. What’s ahead?
Unlike most in the US, I follow what’s going on in Europe, and it isn’t pretty to say the least.
All of the parties rule out an alliance with AfD and BSW. Combined, that is about 26 percent of the total.
The last Grand Coalition (SPD and Union) nearly collapsed and this go around a “grand” coalition might not even have a majority. Note: Union is CDU/CSU.
The German and French governments are both nonfunctional. Neither county has experienced this before.
Meanwhile, back in the US …
Please consider Why Trump Won the Election in One Clear Picture
Voters are angry everywhere, for obvious reasons, but few can figure out why.
The Brookings Institute Wonders Why Consumer Sentiment is So Bad, I Can Help
On November 5, I wrote The Brookings Institute Wonders Why Consumer Sentiment is So Bad, I Can Help
Dear Ursula
I can hardly wait until Greens and SPD are decimated in the next German Federal election. And we won’t have to wait long.
Best of all, Green New Stupidly will fly out the window when a mass of European countries tell the commission president to go to hell.
“Unlike most in the US, I follow what’s going on in Europe, and it isn’t pretty to say the least.”
I also follow whats going on in Europe as I believe it is a precursor to what is eventually coming to North America. Europe has an extreme energy shortage and that will rapidly escalate once America begin reducing exports to them. I predict this isnt too far off in the future and will definitely happen this decade.
Europe as I have stated before will lead the the world into moving into becoming a third world country.
Britain also rapidly becoming an extreme basket case. Just google Britain rationing energy to get a taste of how Britain is going third world.
Europe will experience flat to negative growth much more rapidly than the other industrialized world as Degrowth, Deindustrialization take hold.
Food for thought
In 10ish yrs, the US transforms from a natural gas exporter to a natural gas importer.
Ding, ding, ding, any alarm bells going off?
Anybody see anything wrong with this picture? At current production rates, the US becomes a natural gas importer in 10ish years.
If I were an energy advisor to Trump, I would be advising to Trump to immediately begin curtailing natural gas exports for Americas future and if I were advising the Europeans, I would advise to immediately begin sucking up to the Russians.
The world production-consumption of gas. Expected prices. Shale gas USA.
“2) The U.S. is a monster with feet of clay. Production is enormous, almost 26% of the world total, but consumption is also gigantic, more than 22%. At the moment it is enough to export large quantities in net, but its low reserves put a very unpleasant limit. In 10-15 years it will go from exporter to importer and Europe will once again depend on Russian gas or from the Middle East, which is where the large reserves are.”
Trump’s historic win will bring significant shift in U.S. energy policy
“Regarding natural gas, look for the new Trump Administration to strongly promote development, use and export of natural gas.”
Von der Leyen suggests replacing Russian LNG with US supplies in phone call with Trump
“European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen suggesting replacing Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) with U.S. exports in a phone conversation with U.S. President-elect Donald Trump on Nov. 8.”
All the problems of the environment are technological in origin. Failing to produce sufficiently powerful batteries, wind and solar power are at the mercy of whatever the standard of the day happens to be. Failing to produce fusion power, the hydrogen economy cannot supersede the carbon-based one.
All the low-hanging fruit of the technical world have been picked. Now we are left with nearly insurmountable problems. Add on to this, many engineers are wasted in their talents and twiddle their thumbs in trivial jobs, and you have a recipe for general failure.
The world of practical ideas, which is what engineering is really about, is based on the notion that human beings can reorder the world to their liking. But what if there are fundamental limits which can never be overcome? Probably we are far from such limits, but would we know it if we were standing right next to the wall?
You can read more of my writings by going to: dark-dot-sport-dot-blog where -dot- represents a period .
Yes, as they need to innovate more. Such as develop vertical axis wind turbines with magnetic bearings or very-efficient bearings.
Develop solar panels that work on cloudy days; that may be more of a material science challenge.
Physics says “no” to both of those.
Vertical axis windmills already exist. But last I read they don’t work below a certain rotation rate.
The “EU” started in 1993, and ironically, given their lust for “Self Destructing” Policies, are nearing the end run of these “Self Anointed” Gods! They got rid of Nuclear, have no Oil, have no Gas, and now rely on There Energy Needs from around the unknowing Globe.
Around that same time, we started with our own “Fantasy Actors” wanting to change the World. We had Both the Bush’s (dumb and dumber), Both Clinton’s (Both in Charge Always), and ended with the Puppet Master Obama, with His Puppet “Old Joe” who as we “Heard” has the ability to $#&@ things up… As we All know and saw via. Biden & Kamala “In Charge” whew…
We got rid of Nuclear, Stopped looking for Oil, Stopped looking for Gas, Gave away nearly ALL our reserves, and have Also went “Green Baby” All In!!! We have 50% or so useless EV’s with no buyers, and no infrastructure, We have Massive Bird Destroying Windmills that we can’t build or repair without help, and are destroying our environment around us. We have Solar Panels, which are intermittent at best, environmentally unsound if not handled correctly, are extremely expensive to buy and dispose of. We also can’t build or repair them without help.
“We have many, many Corporations and Most Unions Tied Deeply Within This” Nothing to see here folks, simply move along…
Just look at the EU, and that’s us, lock step, if Trump didn’t Win, and He didn’t get the Senate and House IMO!
One consequence is all energy intense manufacturing must relocate out of Germany because energy costs make German products uncompetitive. BASF is in the process of moving chemical manufactures to Louisiana. VW is closing auto manufacturing in Germany in anticipation of moving to USA. Other industries that must leave are fertilizer, Portland cement, aluminum, steel, and all steel fabrication. Germany can keep the saurkraut and beer.
Hydrogen Will Not Save Us. Here’s Why.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zklo4Z1SqkE
.
Hydrogen Will Not Save Us. Here’s Why.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zklo4Z1SqkE
“The most dumb thing” for energy storage: Hydrogen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIVmSewHqMY
Energy. One of my favorite topics. What are the global trends in energy?
1. The demand for all energy increases every year in order to meet the needs of economic and population growth.
2. The demand for electricity is growing faster now than the overall demand for energy (thanks AI, Crypto, EVs)
3. In spite of spending $5 trillion on renewables over the last few decades, the production of electricity from fossil fuels is still growing each year, because we still can’t build enough renewables to meet the growing demand.
4. It is a good thing that we have built all those renewables. If we had not built any renewables at all, we would be burning a lot more coal, and natural gas to generate electricity and prices would be a lot higher than they are at present.
5. Fossil fuels will remain our primary energy source for a long time. We will be using “more” oil and gas every year going forward for several more decades. Particularly natural gas, which is still plentiful.
6. The US currently produces more oil and natural gas each year than any other country. Our oil production is peaking but we can produce a lot more NG.
7. In 2023, the world traded 404 million tonnes of LNG. The prediction for 2040 is 650 million tonnes. I have been increasing my exposure to NG stocks and reducing oils over the last 6 months. My favorites are still Tourmaline, Arc Resources, Peyto, Nuvista, Diamondback.
8. The countries with the largest NG reserves are:
Russia: 1,688,228,000 mmcf
Iran: 1,201,382,000
Qatar: 871,585,000
US: 368,704,000
9. Continued growth in fossil fuels use will result in higher CO2 levels and more Global Warming. The economic and human cost of global warming will keep increasing each year.
10. We will not be able to reduce our emissions anytime soon, let alone get to net-zero emissions in this century.
Hey Papa, hope your well. I’ll bite…
– The demand for electricity is growing faster now than the overall demand for energy (thanks AI, Crypto, EVs)
> I can’t see how we have even close to the infrastructure needed to allow this supply to be available anytime soon? Where is that technology at or are we capable, but not doing so yet?
– In spite of spending $5 trillion on renewables over the last few decades, the production of electricity from fossil fuels is still growing each year, because we still can’t build enough renewables to meet the growing demand.
> Are renewables even remotely able to have the ability to replace even 30%-40% of our current energy needs, and as you say, is still growing at a very fast clip?
– It is a good thing that we have built all those renewables. If we had not built any renewables at all, we would be burning a lot more coal, and natural gas to generate electricity and prices would be a lot higher than they are at present.
> Doesn’t this sort of state what I did above, but in a differently light, but the same current result? We simply can’t build enough renewables right now or in the very near future, to make all that much of a difference at this point, without the possibility of destroying other power grids we depend on as well?
– Fossil fuels will remain our primary energy source for a long time. We will be using “more” oil and gas every year going forward for several more decades. Particularly natural gas, which is still plentiful.
> Agreed 100%!!!
– The US currently produces more oil and natural gas each year than any other country. Our oil production is peaking but we can produce a lot more NG.
> I was under the impression we had issues preventing much more access to NG, or in the way we were doing so, and oil as well. This has slowed things down quite a bit? You would know, I am going from past recollection, but info led by? May matter…
– We will not be able to reduce our emissions anytime soon, let alone get to net-zero emissions in this century.
> Many would not wish to hear that… true or otherwise. Modern advances will dictate this whether we like it or not. Too much ability to creat yet unforeseen things, and people with money rushing to build/creat them ALL!
Yes. It is going to be difficult to supply enough electricity to meet all our growing needs in the US. I am an advocate for all energy sources. Simply put, the more energy we have available, the stronger our economy, and the higher our standard of living. It is foolish to not promote all forms of energy production. I don’t care if it comes from nuclear, renewables, or fossil fuels. Arguing against renewables is just as foolish as arguing against fossil fuels.
I like nuclear, but the problem with traditional nuclear is time. Fifteen years to build a new facility helps us in the future, but not today. Fission is still a dream. SMRs are running into cost and functional problems and after 16 years of trying, we still don’t have them.
The best approach to meet our immediate needs are natural gas generation, solar and onshore wind. These are currently the lowest cost options and new facilities can be up and running in 2-3 years. And we need to build a lot more of them as quickly as possible.
But we also need more infrastructure; grid upgrades, and new NG pipelines. And we also need more storage facilities for renewables.
Yes, renewables can easily supply 30-40% of all our electricity needs, and they eventually will. They currently provide 21.4% of our electricity (nuclear is 18.6%, fossil fuels is 60% of electricity production). Without renewables we would be burning a lot more NG to produce electricity, and NG prices would probably be a lot higher.
We have no new nuclear reactors planned, and even if we started new ones today, that doesn’t help us for another 15 years. Though I am all for starting construction on new nuclear facilities.
The largest constraints on US natural gas (and oil) production is not enough pipelines. We need to build more pipelines. Then we can drill more wells to fill them, particularly with NG.
With a new Trump administration; some think we will get more drilling. However, there are some constraints coming from Trump as well.
Current breakeven levels for new shale production is between $60 and $70. With WTI at $70, drilling is slowing down, not growing. Unless oil prices rise significantly. There is little incentive to drill. NG prices are even worse. The equivalent of $17 WTI.
In addition, shale drilling requires a lot of “imported” treated steel for drilling equipment, pumps, pipes and tubes. These steel costs were increased by Trump’s original 25% tariffs on steel, and could increase to 60% if he follows through on his newest tariff threats. Higher costs will further reduce the incentive to drill.
Opening up more federal land to exploration is welcome, but it is a multi-year process to get to the production phase and this is unlikely to add additional oil or gas during Trump’s four-year term. Same goes for reducing regulations. Good, but slow to have an effect. And as long as oil and NG prices stay low, the E&P companies are not going to drill a lot.
Hope that helps.
Thanks so much Papa, as usual, your a wealth of solid information! I have some homework to do now, but I appreciate the need, due to the information you have provided. Unfortunately my new puppy has me up at 2:00am est… ugh! Now I have something to do until she tires back out and goes back to bed! Enjoy your day!
Enjoy your puppy!
I do each and every day!
Hey Papa, I got a bit of time to review your response and have added some additional questions, and my comments of course, for your review.
– I am an advocate for all energy sources.
> As am I and if not for today, then to explore at least for tomorrow.
– Arguing against renewables is just as foolish as arguing against fossil fuels.
> To a point I agree, but what if the environmental damage is more damaging and far more costly to clean up, than the cure for the problem? Don’t we run into this with EV Battery Disposal currently? Also with Solar Panels I would imagine. These items, have no mandated by penalty clause when purchased. You can toss them into the nearest river, stream, ocean or mud flat for topic of discussion. That sounds like it’s worth arguing against?
– I like nuclear, but the problem with traditional nuclear is time. Fifteen years to build a new facility helps us in the future, but not today.
> Which is why we should be and should have been building them all along. The stoppage just caused more damage to our environment, by continuing to use far worse means of energy.
– Fission is still a dream. SMRs are running into cost and functional problems and after 16 years of trying, we still don’t have them.
> At some point you have to back burner things until they can make more sense. Sort of like EV Mandates by Unions. Of course they screwed that up for the lower rung union members, but I digress…
– The best approach to meet our immediate needs are natural gas generation, solar and onshore wind. These are currently the lowest cost options and new facilities can be up and running in 2-3 years. And we need to build a lot more of them as quickly as possible.
> But we also need more infrastructure; grid upgrades, and new NG pipelines. And we also need more storage facilities for renewables. Why invest in Solar when we don’t own and can’t manufacture them (my understanding) just yet. Wait! Same with Wind Farms, as we are not yet ready to do so, and be in control of the results.
– Yes, renewables can easily supply 30-40% of all our electricity needs, and they eventually will. They currently provide 21.4% of our electricity (nuclear is 18.6%, fossil fuels is 60% of electricity production). Without renewables we would be burning a lot more NG to produce electricity, and NG prices would probably be a lot higher.
> My time frame is way longer and way more costly than yours I can tell. I don’t see Windmills and Solar offering up anywhere near what’s proposed now. I think eventually at some point way down the line, we will be able too, but we are not close enough yet, to be going full scale IMO. Maybe the technology is far more advanced than I understand it to be for the U.S. but I don’t see it?
– We have no new nuclear reactors planned, and even if we started new ones today, that doesn’t help us for another 15 years. Though I am all for starting construction on new nuclear facilities.
> Agreed and Immediately IMO.
– Current breakeven levels for new shale production is between $60 and $70. With WTI at $70, drilling is slowing down, not growing. Unless oil prices rise significantly. There is little incentive to drill. NG prices are even worse. The equivalent of $17 WTI. In addition, shale drilling requires a lot of “imported” treated steel for drilling equipment, pumps, pipes and tubes. These steel costs were increased by Trump’s original 25% tariffs on steel, and could increase to 60% if he follows through on his newest tariff threats. Higher costs will further reduce the incentive to drill. Opening up more federal land to exploration is welcome, but it is a multi-year process to get to the production phase and this is unlikely to add additional oil or gas during Trump’s four-year term.
> This doesn’t look like a doable option for relief anytime soon. I was misguided into thinking this was closer to reality of adding to our needs much quicker.
>> I still have a lot to understand, but being told so many things, that are not true, and or misleading has me more perplexed, as many must be as well. How two leaderships could have such different approaches to a Prosperous, and Safe America is beyond Me… I will go back and decider more and try to wrap my head around what’s real, and what’s imagined in todays News Cycles…
– Hope that helps.
> Absolutely and as always, as you’re a straight shooter. I like that! It’s what we need from people more than ever now. Enough opinions and more facts. I try hard to base my understanding on what I read and decipher it to mean, but it does get harder and harder with this MSM we have in play today!!!
Enjoy your day, as I head out to Golf for the last time, here anyway, more than likely…
Response. In part.
No. 1 has to change. Economics is the science and study of how to manage scarcity. Demand for energy cannot continue growing and by Stein’s law will stop growing. Then we get to how to manage use of a ceilinged resource.
No. 2 as you state it is logically incoherent. How can demand increase faster than demand?
No. 4 has logic problems too. If renewables cost more than coal and/or gas, then building renewable capacity is an economic “bad” and we are worse off than if we had built more coal and/or gas capacity.
SMR’s if possible will be an international game changer. The current system is FUBB, takes 14 years to build a plant b/c of government red tape bullshit. China is spitting them out like a pez dispenser. This is a company that sounds exciting if it succeeds. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pfTyGYCxjc&t=1s
China is spitting out smr’s like a pez dispenser? Currently they have ONE. And it’s a research project. Russia and India also have ONE each for research as well.
Seriously? What it like being the worlds biggest KNOW IT ALL? See link. https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61927 Recent article I read, can’t find the source, but they are embarking on a massive nuclear buildout with construction time about 2 years. So I stand corrected, they will be spitting them out like a nuclear pez dispenser.
Yes. China is building a lot of large nuclear plants. Over 20 under construction at the moment. Typically it takes 5-7 years to complete each one.
No, they are not spitting out smr’s like pez candy. Get your facts straight.
LOL. Infomercial. I would rather look at something more substantial.
Lol they are a private startup and it’s just an example of what is coming. I’m sure there are more of these companies trying the same thing. That’s the point, I hope you get it.
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Why-SMRs-Are-Taking-Longer-Than-Expected-to-Deploy.html
That is what I was looking for.
The rest of the world would be better off without the “leadership “ of Germany and England.
No long ago, the World was screaming: The rest of the world would be better off without the “leadership” of America!
It’s not like Germany is going to march into Poland. Wait a minute. Doesn’t Germany has a regiment in Poland now?
Who possibly could have foreseen this clusterfuck? Certainly not any of us deplorables. 😂😂
Alvin Weinberg, Syd Ball and Dick Engel Oakridge TN produced mini nukes good to go, but in the mid sixties LBJ favored large nuclear plants. Sixty years later we are trying to catch up with China.
Just want to remind everyone that hydrogen is not a source of energy, merely a way to store it for use.
Unlike gas, coal, petroleum, wind and solar, no one extracts hydrogen from the earth, seas or sky. Hydrogen therefore doesn’t power anything all by itself.
Hydrogen storage is most like electric batteries – once you charge it up you can use it, but the energy charge has to come from an actual energy source.
Don’t you mean ‘not at present’? Science has a tendency of making things possible that were previously impossible, or not economically feasible.
Conversion to and from Hydrogen costs half your energy supply. Hydrogen storage is a non starter because it doubles the cost of energy.
Here in France we have no wind and fog but they don’t care because they have nuclear and sell electricity to the Germans at high prices. It has been generally recognized now that Germany did its all to sink France’s nuclear program because it gave French industry the advantage of cheaper power than German industry had and that they used the EU institutions to do it. People are pretty pissed off about it.
How did they try to sink the French nuclear program?
I would have thought, they would be more pizzed when they shouted to the world: come on open border and free stuff, despite Shengen and all.
There is a deeply ingrained tardism in German culture.
First by handicapping the price advantage by having the EU set the price of electricity on the price of natural gas (mostly from Russia) and secondly by pressuring the French government from building new plants and decommissioning old ones especially those on the French-German border. Almost every negotiation involved nuclear as a make or break and successive French governments gave in because they were told that nuclear wasn’t green and that it was a dying industry anyway. The Russian invasion woke them up and they rejected the German Greens blackmail because it was blackmail.
I follow what’s going on in Europe, and it isn’t pretty to say the least.
Well unless you think that the Greens crashing actually is VERY pretty. Or the possibility of moving the EU Centre morons out of power as well.
Reorienting European power is a process, and they will not move as far as we have here.
Still removing UVDLs base of support cannot be considered anything but awesome. For she is evil.
“The German and French governments are both nonfunctional. Neither county has experienced this before.” I don’t know about France, but Germany’s political parties could not put together a ruling coalition government after the July and November 1932 Reichstag elections. In January, 1933, one of the smaller parties worked out a deal with the Nazi party to form a government and Germany’s president reluctantly went along with the plan. Under the old Weimar constitution, a political party could gain representation in the Reichstag with as little as 1% of the popular vote. According to Wikipedia, about 14 parties were represented in the Reichstag after the 1932 elections. These days, a political party needs to get at least 5% of the votes to gain representation in the Reichstag. With this higher hurdle, there are fewer parties in the Reichstag but since 1949, neither the old West Germany nor unified Germany has had a majority government.
If you are interested in keeping up with political developments in Germany and you have a Firestick or Roku streaming device, look for the DW channel, the German public broadcaster. This channel broadcasts in English.DW also covers major events in foreign countries.
Difficulties forming a national government suggest that the nation is too large, and should be broken up, like Britain was in getting rid of Ireland c.1920, and Austro-Hungary was in late 1918. So, what do the political divisions look like in the German Lands (states)?
America has the edge on AI will Trump F it up?
Trump’s AI Choice: Compete or Control?The critical risk excessive tariffs and export controls pose to America’s AI edgehttps://digitalspirits.substack.com/p/trumps-ai-choice-compete-or-control?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1490510&post_id=151389956&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=3o9&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
I left off hybrids. Added a line
If DUCs and the easy to extract are depleted we are going to have a Dunkelflaute.
Pushing too hard on the green power transition from a tax and regulatory position is economically foolhardy. As technology advances it will evolve greener due to it making economic sense especially when the costs of dirty energy are factored in.
I believe this is accurate, timeline unclear.
The greens risk alienating moderates by imposing higher energy costs and lower delivery.
Redundancy is costly. When the sun shine green is king. The rest – at peak consumption and at peak prices – are on the bench. We cannot survive without NG, coal, nuke and energy exported energy from other states (Ners #1 and #2). When the sun shine it clogs the rest. A naked king without Putin’s Nerd #1 & #2 ==> dark doldrums.
The problem was obvious decades ago, when Britain realized it needed backup for all of its green energy programs. Duplication doubles the cost. Go figure!.
Though I agree with you and often make the same argument, it is possible, though not at the current relative prices for most places, that some combination of “green” energy and nuclear, coal or gas is cheaper than not having any “green” energy.
Though currently that is the exception rather than the rule. I don’t think that will change much in the near ( i.e. my lifetime) future.
There is also the choice, and the management of “load shedding”. When the sun doesn’t shine, the wind doesn’t blow, we set aside work and purposes that need it and do something else or go idle ourselves. Become more of a jack of all work. capable of doing several things, according to what has the most value right now.
Remember, these are autocrats that will never PERSONALLY run out of Power or money (power in both senses). THEY will be fine, in ivory towers, while the masses freeze.
Which is exactly why the last President of the US with anything useful to contribute, pointed out the importance of a; literal; revolution every generation.
After all: Exactly this sort of idiocy and decay, IS the INEVITABLE endpoint of ALL nonsense focused on “saving the syyyystem” at all and any cost.
DESTROYING “The Syyyystem”; ANY “System”; is what matters. It’s what made America great once they dumped the Brits. As well as what made Europe and Japan functional again, post WW2.
YES: Even carpet bombing and nuking is preferable to “saaaving the syyystem.” Always and everywhere where a “syyystem” has been around much beyond Jefferson’s rule-of-thumb generation. Which does not imply there can not exist any possible system destroying rite which are perhaps preferable to nuking a place. Nuking is pretty drastic, and not really all that, after all. But: Compared to instead “saving the syyystem”, and with it the leeching classes and institutions built up, propped up, enriched, empowered, protected and privileged by it, even such an all out nuking, IS an improvement. Heck, for anyone a bit slow on the uptake: I present Von der Leyden…. And the rest of her ilk. In Europe, America and everywhere.
I’m not convinced ‘saving the system’ is the causal factor.More likely, IMHO, it is an ingrained way of thinking, conditioned to certain political mandates (and seldom innovative), exacerbated by central planning–ie liberal attributes.
Example, because of Gore’s fallacious ‘hockey stick,’ the Democrats bought into Global Warming, and preferred energy systems, at the cost of other equally sustainable technologies.
At the end of the day, it was about getting votes. A real ‘warming’ crisis, all private plane and car travel would be curtailed, as would pleasure boating. The result was, and still is, a farce..
“I’m not convinced ‘saving the system’ is the causal factor..”
In any “system”, those who arbitrarily have benefitted from it by obtaining greater wealth/power/influence, WILL use that influence to self deal. Such that next year, they will have MORE wealth/power/influence. And are hence in an even better position to self deal. And so forth…. Always. Everywhere. No exceptions. Except blowing the entire “system” to smithereens. Regularly and thoroughly. Rebooting. Hard. Every generation.
Such a reboot was why there was a boom post WW2 in the US, Europe and Japan: The useless, privileged dilettantes making up the former “system”, had relied on so called “laws” and other idiotic preferential accesses to the force of Government, to prevent free markets from flushing them down the drain where they belonged,throughout the 30s,in the process creating and prolonging a depression which free markets would have cleared in weeks if left alone. But instead, everything was locked up and frozen.
WW2 was great (to ALL those who did not directly get hit by ordnance…), as it flushed that existing “System” down the drain. Everything which flushes ALL “Systems” down the drain is great.
It’s the same story today. Just on an even even greater scale.
There is some hope that there may exist ways to accomplish that with less material destruction than WW3. $20/oz; no activity taxes, no standing army and no entangling alliances does at least theoretically appear to have the ability to accomplish that. But, if not, even another reset-via-Word War, is STILL an improvement over anything which “saves the system.” “Saving the system” is THE absolute worst. Runner up probably being complete reduction-to-roaches-only Nuclear Armageddon.
Governments have a propensity to ‘hive-mind’ on just about any subject, convincing themselves their solution is the only one. Group think tends to be worse with liberals, since the only solution is government imposed, not free-market generated.
Nuclear power is not always an easy option,it requires reasonable amount of water. Think steam turbines. Estuary of a river is an ideal location.
Gas is ideal, but not in a traditional sense, i.e. steam generation. Think jet engines, but instead of jet fuel, using natural gas.
Given that the Greens still command ~10% of votes across many countries, the scare resource in a democracy seems to be high IQ population, think bell curve.
Nuclear fuel is also not infinitely plentiful at reasonable cost.
Which is another way of saying: It is not about (OR gas oil nuclear hydro wind wave bio…). But instead (AND ….). As in: All of them.
Absent/until/unless truly fundamental fusion, “we’ll” always be faced with an energy shortage. Hence, it would really behoove to instead focus on where each source excels RELATIVE to the others.
From an environmental POV, meaning: Burn the dirtiest stuff where A)There are the fewest people and other higher species. B)In places such as developed world large power generation plants, where economies of scale allows for as clean a burn; and possible pollutant capture; as possible. Such that naturally cleaner stuff remains maximally available for uses where on-site cleaning is harder.
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/worlds-uranium-resources-enough-for-the-foreseeable-future-say-nea-and-iaea-in-new-report
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-long-will-global-uranium-deposits-last/
230 years, which is long enough to get into space and find new off-world energy sources.
Electricity rates are much lower in Paris than in Berlin. France is heavily dependent on nuclear power.
There is nuclear fuel reprocessing although only a few countries do it. France is one, and Japan was building one before Fukushima. Otherwise, we would have run out of nuclear fuel.
“There is nuclear fuel reprocessing..”
But no perpetual motion…
There’s enough coal for hundreds of years and enough fission fuel for thousands to millions of years. That ought to get us to fusion, which has enough fuel for over 100 million years.
There is no energy shortage, only a lack of implementation.
There’s a lot of Gold too, in the earth’s core, if cost is absolutely no object.
More realistically: The Earth is rather finite by now. The prime cuts have largely been consumed. There is more easy coal left than easy preferable-hydrocarbons, but burning it cleanly enough for people accustomed to natgas and hydro, is not cheap.
Prices for virtually all sources of energy are on a long term rising trend. Meaning: It takes more and more work to get less and less of it. That’s not a recipe for increasing wealth.
There’s still a positive return. Or at least there was, back before idiotification seemingly convinced the dunce classes that spending a few terrawatts of datacenter compute on determining that “you, know, like that number that, like, you know, not the first one that’s my thumb but, like that other finger, like if you take that on the other hand too and, like, you know…” is indeed 4; instead of expecting people to be able to communicate like literate beings and formulate themselves precisely; is somehow a sign of “progress.”
Were it just IQ? Anyone born in the last 40 years has been conditioned by sub-standard teachers as a result of affirmative action. Teachers’ colleges across the US were infected by liberals during Vietnam. They taught the teachers, who taught the kids. If a kid rejected the educational paradigm, they were put on Ritalin. Nowadays education for gifted kids has largely disappeared–it is simply too elitist.
IQ without the thinking processes to go along with it, matters little.
There is one more energy policy choice that Mish did not discuss at all, = Energy conservation, using less energy. It should be obvious that this is the choice that Greens like best. (They *want* to “freeze in the dark.”)
And, so far, no discussion of how to get to a community (or ‘communisty’) that lives equitably and comfortably at a lower “footprint” level.
World population is already in decline, with lower consumption (and declining economy) probably accompanying it; or at least plateauing.
Hence Musk is right to signal the need for humanity to focus on developing space.
Nope. Where did you get that? World population is expected to continue to increase till around 2064; peaking at around 9.7 billion. It should then begin to decline.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/07/200715150444.htm
We have already been making great strides in energy conservation for the last hundred years. It has never resulted in us using less energy. It simply enables us to use even more energy at a reasonable price.
The curse of Jevons Paradox =
Jevons paradox – Wikipedia
In economics, the Jevons paradox occurs when technological progress increases the efficiency with which a resource is used (reducing the amount necessary for any one use), but the falling cost of use induces increases in demand enough that resource use is increased, rather than reduced.
The challenge is breaking that paradox. The Greens’ solution is to force conservation by reducing the availability of the resource. They talked about voluntary measures in the 1980s. Now they are going mandatory.
When you have belief in myths like the fully debunked extremist alt-left cvonspiracy theory they call “global warming”, you will continue to tilt at windmills – until you freeze to death in the winter.
Maybe we can use frozen liberals for Christmas displays.
Me, I’ve converted everyting I own to burning high-sulphur coal, for greater efficiency.
Lignite. Germany is burning it now. And if that helps heat the Earth, well, thanks, Germany!
Correct. It does help heat the earth.
Fully debunked? Lol! Got some science to back up that claim?
Germany will become as green, clean, and impoverished as Congo. Our prosperous industrial civilization was built on fossil fuels. Life without fossil fuels was tried four hundred years ago. Life then was solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.
Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short. Like democrat women.
Long WTI. The biggest contrarian trade available.
[…] Now Germany Has a Green Electricity Outage With Huge Consequences […]
Top 10 U.S. states as a % of US renewable energy (2022)
1. Texas
2. Washington
3. California
4. Iowa
5. Oregon
6. Oklahoma
7. New York
8. Kansas
9. Illinois
10. Colorado
Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_renewable_electricity_production
Never knew deep red Texas was run by green environmentalists. /s
It’s completely based on geography, weather and available land, but thanks.
Perot.
Not a history specialist but can’t help but wonder if any country has shot themselves in the foot as badly as Germany has in the last few years.
Ah, the U.S. under Biden/Harris.
Germany has done this repeatedly in the last 120 years. 1914 and 1939 come to mind. There are likely others.
I know some liberal Germans (HARD LEFT GLOBALISTS) and they are PIPING ANGRY about Trump. I asked my Pal, an Oil writer: “What exactly did Trump do in the past as President that can be defined as TYRANNICAL?” CHIRPING BIRDS.
I have the same experience. Many European “intellectuals” are having emotional breakdowns because of Trump’s victory. They just cannot conceive that anyone on the Left can be the bad guys. Fortunately the rank-and-file aren’t listening to them anymore. That is perhaps the reason why the intellectuals are having breakdowns. Fewer and fewer listen to them anymore.
Venezuela, Argentina, Zimbabwe, South Africa.
Iran, Iraq, China, North Korea, Afghanistan, Congo, South Africa, all the best places.
America. COME ON, WAKE UP. You must be European, because if you lived here, the PROVERBIAL FOOT has been missing a while and we are balancing on one leg.
The same weather conditions are in effect in Washington state. See the green line.
https://transmission.bpa.gov/business/operations/wind/baltwg.aspx
I worked on the new nuclear project in South Carolina that was cancelled in 2017. While the design of the plant was very good and units of similar design have performed well, the designer (Westinghouse) made some very poor decisions in selecting suppliers of the components. It also did not help that after the design was largely completed, the NRC imposed a requirement that the plant withstand an intentional aircraft strike.
But a major problem was finding qualified people to build the plant. Finding engineers wasn’t the problem. It was finding ironworkers, welders, carpenters, electricians etc. that could meet the requirements for nuclear construction. We were in competition with an identical plant under construction in Georgia for workers and had to scour the country to find them. Many of these workers were in their 50s or older. Seemed to have a high injury rate and there were a few heart attacks.
While emphasizing college for decades, the craft trades were ignored. This is going to be a problem for a nuclear revival, even for the Small Modular Reactors.
Another problem will be finding operations and maintenance people who can pass FBI background checks, drug/alcohol screening, psychological screening and credit checks required for many nuclear jobs.
“It was finding ironworkers, welders, carpenters, electricians etc. that could meet the requirements for nuclear construction”
That’s what I have been saying for years here on this site. it’s not just those workers for nuke plants, it’s those workers for everything. Houses keep getting built all over the country but the amount of plumbers and electricians never kept up with the growth so when those homes age, there won’t be enough people to fix them so costs will soar. The same for roads, bridges, sky scrappers, etc.
Ditto for pilots, doctors, nurses, all kinds of engineers, etc. and we have low birth rates and now have an administration that wants to end immigration and deport people that *could* be trained but why bother, let’s just have massive inflation.
Pick up and read the history of the kibbutz movement in Israel. It is not quite the Keynes reading of Say’s Law, that demand will call supply into existence, but necessity is the mother of invention. We have lots of underemployed people. Let’s put them to work!
BTW, back 1993 I read an article about the underground economy in the USA. One example was a Nicaraguan educator immigrant to Florida. Government prevented him from getting an education certificate or job in Florida, so he worked at installing drywall instead.
& “Let’s just have massive inflation.”
Aside from the above, “massive inflation” also serves to destroy demand. At least until supply is able to catch up.
If you think a bunch of overweight lazy Americans are going to come together and become the Amish, you’re dreaming but I’d love to see MAGA picking crops at farms, that would be really entertaining.
The unspoken truth is that everyone’s quality of life is determined by the ratio of your wealth to the number of “quasi-slaves” you have access to in your environment.
If you earn $60k in the U.S., you’re going to have a poor quality of life because you can’t afford many goods and services created by the “quasi-slaves.” If you earn $60k in Cambodia, you’re going to live like a king. The salary is the same but the ratio is different because you will have access to lower cost labor in Cambodia than U.S. therefore more access to “quasi-slaves.”
With the demographic death spiral in the U.S., everyone will be competing for a shrinking pool of labor. There will be 80m people on social handouts by 2030, ~140m workers and the rest too young, disabled, or lazy to work.
I did my time as a quasi-slave myself, I wasn’t born rich so I’ve paid my dues and I see what’s coming so it’s time to move on.
Mathematically, everyone’s quality of life will decline and it will take $400k/year to live a middle class life over the next decade. If your plan is a kibbutz, good luck.
Yeah and you want those quasi-slaves to be brought into developed countries to replace the population, and keep wages low, so that you can enjoy a lower cost of living yourself – so selfish and unpatriotic.
It’s not just me, if you’ve lived in America and enjoyed your lifestyle it was at the expense of those quasi-slaves so stop being a hypocrite. The quasi-slaves are running out so what comes next is lower quality of life across the spectrum.
Keep your patriotism, it won’t keep your belly full, nor provide you with healthcare nor warmth on a cold winter night, only money will but let me know how that all works out for you.
Were the 1970s Sears catalogs faked like the moon landings?
Latin America has doctors and engineers. The people sneaking into the U.S. are generally not engineering material.
Yes they do, are you going to advocate bringing them here because that will involve immigration and under current law it will take like 10 years for them to get a green card. How many do you think will come or will they decide they are better off staying in Latin America and living like a king there vs a peasant here?
See the problem?
Meanwhile, the countries they come from remain underdeveloped for all the rest of their population who are not engineers, just so that your personal living costs do not rise to reflect the real cost of engineering.
In Europe the same problem afflicts health professionals – people are unwilling to pay the true cost of healthcare and the years of training or the skill involved, and want to enjoy all that for peanuts. It’s abusive.
If engineers from Latin America are needed, they can get an H-1b visa right away. I am in favor or merit-based immigration – like they have in Australia and Canada. The funny thing about people saying they’re moving to Canada is that Canada won’t take them! It’s hard for Americans to get a work permit in Canada. Hell, you can’t even get in to go fishing if you have a marijuana or drunk driving conviction on your record.
I’m not moving to Canada but good luck cherry picking labor from around the world, there is a race by every nation now to attract talent, it will go where it’s treated best.
Immigration does not solve this problem… how many illegal immigrants have the education and training backgrounds you list? Most are low-skilled black-market criminalia, unwilling and unable to study or train, and just want to get rich quick.
As an engineer, I can tell you that every time the engineering institutions collude with companies to breathlessly report shortages of engineers, what they are really doing is complaining about paying engineers what they are worth. No profession has as big a positive impact on humanity than engineering, and no profession is as undervalued at every level.
If you want more engineers and technicians, let the market pay them more, make it desireable as a career to motivate people to train for it, rather than praising and elevating sportspeople and vapid startuppers and socialmediaites.
Companies generally refuse to pay well or invest in training of engineers and technicians, they want magical wizards for minimum wage.
Rather than import people, why not train the ones you have?! Why not create financial incentives for companies to invest and train, instead of exploiting the lowest wage foreigners they can? Immigration is precisely the problem, not the solution.
Paying engineers and technicians what they are worth is not “inflation” is scarcity and demand… imagine how much of the world you depend on would not exist without engineers and technicians, and then imagine how valuable they are, but no… all people like you want to do is keep engineers and technicians on the lowest incomes possible by undercutting them with immigrants – people like you are dispicable and ungrateful, and you take the world that engineers from your own country build for you for granted, and you disrespect engineers and technicians and the entire profession by insisting that we must be paid the same as cleaners and shopworkers.
pro-immigrant avocates are assholes.
Yours, an actual engineer.
“Why not create financial incentives for companies to invest and train,” The reason is that’s picking winners and losers.
That is a perennial and thorny develop economies subject. Done best, those lower-cost engineers over there are perfectly good staying over there. I have done phone interviews with managers and recruiters in India, and I sympathize regarding their working hours, about 12 hours ahead of ours. I have heard of some Americans who get engineering jobs in India.
Those lower-cost engineers over there are perfectly good staying over there, and building those industries over there. Someday they aspire to sell the products they make, like Toyota, Honda and Samsung, in America, and take market away from Ford and Chevrolet and Westinghouse. Another way of losing your job. It is an economic truth that costs go down, notably recognized by Austrian economists. It is a Red-Queen race to keep up with all the people competing with you. And it is a tough life if you lose and wind up in Flint MI.
I read years ago about Brazil protecting their software industry. Then the software industry elsewhere made a big advance. So Brazil faced the quandary of abolishing those industry protections, or not obtaining products using the latest technology.
So the same problems that plague the chip factories under construction by TSMC and Samsung. Irreversible decline is the name.
Mini nukes biggest problem are steel pipelines and components that can survive the heat and the high pressure.
This is true globally – you’d think blue collar technicians would be living it up by now – but instead they are undermined by patricians in power with degrees, the beneficiaries of over-financialisation of developed economies.
Take people and train them. Companies want everything to be done for them for some reason these days. In the past when a company needed workers with skills and none were available, they rolled up their sleeves and trained them. Every industry did this. There are lots of people smart enough to learn these skills and if you pay them their worth they will stay with you.
Germany is such a ridiculous country.
Under the right leader, Germany can do amazing things.
Germany is a feminine socialist culture. Germany left its best barrel of semen on the Russian front.
Every country can.
As long as “the right leader” is properly understood to mean something awfully close to NO leader, that is.
Fail to comprehend that one, and it doesn’t matter where you are: You ARE stuck in an inevitably decaying, totalitarian, kleptocratic, rapidly idiotifying dystopia. Current Germany/Europe/West being just the latest and most obvious examples.