this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2023
183 points (87.0% liked)

World News

32286 readers
779 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Growth in german wind capacity is slowing. Soo... then the plan is to keep on with lignite and gas? Am I missing something?

Installed Wind Capacty - Germany

German Wind Capacity

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rooty@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You forgot:

  • Not able to provide energy during the night/calm days
  • Not energy dense - require enormous amount of land that can be put to better use
  • Rely on battery storage - huge fire and explosion hazard
  • Need to be replaced and serviced much more often - the lack of density means that repair and maintenance crew have a lot of ground to cover
  • Energy output wildly fluctuates due to weather conditions.

Renewables have their place, but they cannot sustain the entire grid. At this point, going all in on renewables means either prolonging fossil fuel usage, or condemning vast swaths of the population to brownouts and energy poverty.

[–] Blake@feddit.uk -3 points 1 year ago

Look at all of these wrong arguments. It’s so thoughtful of you to bring them all together like this.

  1. It’s always day somewhere. Also there’s still wind, wave, geothermal, hydroelectric, etc. not to mention interconnectors. Additionally, energy demand during the night is very low. Peak energy usage is at the same time as peak solar generation. The idea is that if you spread renewables across a large enough area, natural shortages of wind/sun in one area is compensated for the wind/sun being in another area.
  2. It’s true that it isn’t energy dense, but it’s definitely not true that it can be “put to better use”. 5% of the US is covered in parking spaces, enough to provide 8 spaces for every car. If 10% of that land was allocated to solar power it would be enough to meet the electricity demand of the entire United States.
  3. Doesn’t rely on energy storage. Just build interconnectors. Electrical energy can be moved from where it is greatest in supply to where it is greatest in demand. Additionally, electrochemical batteries aren’t the only choice, there are countless ways to store electrical energy - pumped storage, thermal storage, etc.
  4. This is outright wrong. Source your claim that nuclear is easier and cheaper to maintain than renewables. I’ll wait.
  5. This is the same as your first point. See 1.

You’re wrong. There are numerous studies which say a 100% renewable future is entirely possible with current technology. Since you’re incapable of googling this basic fact here’s a link for you. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/100%25_renewable_energy