Germany Faces Energy Crisis

schisteGRANDEvery second power plant planned in Germany is about to fold. The willingness to invest is decreasing rapidly as even the most efficient gas-fired power plants can no longer be operated profitably. 50 existing power plants could be decommissioned later this year. Germany’s green energy revolution is at a critical turning point. —Deutsche Mittelstands Nachrichten, 13 April 2015

The economic viability of some 53 percent or 39 of the power plants planned for construction in Europe’s largest economy by 2025 has been called into question, German energy industry association BDEW said in a statement on Monday. The association said investors were nervous because of lacking profitability for coal- and gas-fired power stations because of competing energy supplies from subsidised renewable power, and a tougher carbon emissions regime. Germany, which is due to phase out nuclear energy by 2022, could face supply bottlenecks in the next few years. –Vera Eckert, Reuters, 13 April 2015

Germany’s Irsching gas-fired power plant, one of Europe’s newest, is to be shut down in April next year, its operators said on Monday, as competition from renewable energy pushes conventional stations out of business. Irsching is one of many power stations in Germany that are running at a fraction of the time needed to be profitable, replaced by solar and wind energy which has priority access to the grid. The statement, which puts pressure on the German government to come up with a solution for modern but loss-making power plants, did not say what impact the decision would have on jobs. –-Reuters, 30 March 2015

Of all the unintended consequences of EU climate policy perhaps the most bizarre is the detrimental effect of wind and solar schemes on the price of electricity generated by natural gas. Gas-fired power generation has become uneconomic in the EU, even for some of the most efficient and least carbon-intensive plants. –Benny Peiser, Testimony To U.S. Senate Committee Hearing, 2 December 2014

The EU’s dysfunctional political system is turning clean energy companies into a “zombie industry” of the living dead, the head of one of the bloc’s biggest green power groups has warned. Manuel Sánchez Ortega, chief executive of Spain’s Abengoa, said EU politicians are taking so long to decide what sort of energy mix they want, especially in the biofuels sector, that companies do not know if they should keep struggling on or shut down completely. “It’s ridiculous. The EU is creating a zombie industry for clean energy” thanks to bureaucratic delays. –Pilita Clark, Financial Times, 12 April 2015

France’s refusal to countenance exploiting shale gas deposits will cost it up to €293 billion and 225,000 jobs over the next three decades, according to a confidential government report. The report, which came down in favour of waterless fracking, was leaked to the media yesterday after it had been shelved by President Hollande’s Socialist-led cabinet. France’s radical shale gas laws make it an offence even to look for the fuel. “Shale gas is no longer on the agenda,” said Ségolène Royal, the environment minister, who is Mr Hollande’s former partner. –Adam Sage, The Times, 8 April 2015

New technologies are rapidly revealing the bounty of Britain’s onshore energy resources. The latest find is a field near London’s Gatwick Airport, which could contain 100 billion barrels of oil—if British politicians are willing to drill. That’s a major upgrade from previous assessments of the region, and it follows other recent oil-and-gas discoveries across Britain. Now Britain’s politicians will need to decide whether they value energy security and jobs more highly than environmentalist scare tactics. –Editorial, The Wall Street Journal, 10 April 2015

Fracking could be used to exploit vast oil reserves discovered under South East England, despite pledges by the company behind the find that it will not use the controversial technique. ‘We reckon five to 15 per cent can be got out of the oil in place,’ David Lenigas said, ‘but we have seen numbers with technology and going to fracking you can get up to 30 to 40 per cent recovery out of some of these things. But I am not interested in doing that.’ Across the Weald basin, which covers much of East and West Sussex and Surrey, the bonanza could hit 100 billion barrels. Even with low recovery rates, the find is the biggest since the North Sea. –Simon Watkins, Mail on Sunday, 12 April 2015

More than half of Poland’s new major power generation projects to be built in the next four years will be coal-fired in spite of strict targets imposed by the EU on its member countries, capacity projections show. According to data collected by ICIS, a total of 7.8GW will be added to the Polish electricity grid in the next four years, of which 4.6GW will be coal-fired power plants built by the country’s biggest state-owned utilities. To add to this bearish prediction, the European Commission approved Poland’s Temporary National Plan, under which implementation of the Industrial Emissions Directive has been delayed from 2016 to 2020. —ICIS News, 13 April 2015

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (19)

  • Avatar

    GR82DRV

    |

    Frankly, I hope that several European countries will refuse [i]all[/i] energy not derived from wind or solar sooner rather than later. I just wish that Germany, as one of the most sane and productive members of the E.U., did not lead the way.

    The world needs a socioeconomic laboratory to showcase the the [i]true[/i] state of non-carbon energy potential. Instead we are constantly regaled with the unlimited virtues of “green” energy as these hyper-tax-funded efforts consistently fall desperately short of their Utopian promises.

    I nominate Greece.

  • Avatar

    Gator

    |

    [quote]Fracking could be used to exploit vast oil reserves discovered under South East England, despite pledges by the company behind the find that it will not use the controversial technique.[/quote]

    Fracking is only controversial because of [i]lying freaks[/i]. In the US, we have been fracking for [i]over a century[/i], and there has never been a documented contamination of aquifers or drinking water, ever. It has been a mainstream practice for over 50 years now and [i]used in over a million wells[/i]. [i]Not [b]one[/b] case of contamination[/i].

    How then is fracking controversial?

    God people are stupid!

    Head of the EPA?

    And again?

    • Avatar

      pyeatte

      |

      Fracking is controversial because it works. The far-left hates energy production that works, and like only the ones that are too expensive and don’t work.

      • Avatar

        Gator

        |

        Like I said…

        [i]Fracking is only controversial because of lying freaks.[/i]

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    What happened to Germany ? When unemployment gets close to the EU average
    Germans are not going to tolerate the foolish energy/environment policies that help trash their economy .

  • Avatar

    Frederick Colbourne

    |

    Forget Europe.

    The end is not nigh, but the good times are over.

    Depending on how successful the Greens are in the US in the 2016 elections, you can forget the best of times there also.

    Me? I have retired in Southeast Asia where, they pay lip service to Greens but have more sense than to implement radical energy policies.

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    The USA Democrats and a few other country leaders are the only ones living in the Twilight Zone . Obama will be long gone by the time his legacy of selling out the USA economy for NO gain gets fully realized .

    Hillary Clinton if elected is going to have to fix the mess .

    As Fredrick Colbourne above correctly observes Southeast Asia is not about to sell out to greenie pressure tactics .

    If Hillary campaigns promoting Obama’s agenda she is done and it has nothing to do with caring for the environment .

    People are on to the scam and they don’t like the hypocrites in the scary global warming religion preaching their self dealing interest .

    • Avatar

      JayPee

      |

      Uh, Amber

      She’ll have to fix the mess ?

      I, personally guarantee, she has no intention of doing so.

      If you think O’bama is treasonously destructive, you’ll be overwhelmed how B/Hillary takes money for treason.

      They’ve done it before and just because they are unprosecuted traitors doesn’t mean they won’t do it again.

      Start now by demanding where all her campaign money is coming from. She has over a billion already. Demand how much is from foreign and Islamic interests.

  • Avatar

    William P Gloege

    |

    Environmental “scare”? Are we saying here climate change is a hoax? Run for Congress as a Republican in the US. You’ll feel at home with other anti science types. Global warming is the biggest threat to your corporations – not just people who you could care less about. We are heading for a 6th earth global extinction in the scientific opinion of people who know earth science. France seems the only country smart enough to understand all this. Seeing nothing but profit can kill you – and all of us. Check California where a climate change drought is about to collapse the State that is living on its dwindling ground water savings alone. We have 400 parts per million in the atmosphere and that leads to a warming planet. Mother Nature has no political opinions. She goes by hard rules of science. No negotiation – period.

    • Avatar

      amirlach

      |

      [quote]You’ll feel at home with other anti science types.[/quote] Who is anti science? The Co2 alarmists call models with ZERO predictive skill scientific “evidence”. 100% of IPCC Models have failed. If it is not predictive, it is not scientific. Period.
      [quoteProfessor Richard Feynman, Nobel Laureate in Physics said, “It does not matter who you are, or how smart you are, or what title you have, or how many of you there are, and certainly not how many papers your side has published, if your prediction is wrong then your hypothesis is wrong. Period.” [/quote]
      [img]https://informativestats.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/hayden_ipcc_arrow.jpg[/img]

      The reason they fail id because the alarmists keep DENYING the growing evidence that Climate Sensitivity is a lot lower than what is programed into the models. These are the true “deniers”.
      [quote]Climatologist Dr. Pat Michaels writes:
      In his introductory remarks, Congressman Lowenthal (D-NY) went on the usual these-witnesses-are-climate-deniers rant. As I was the next speaker, I re-wrote my oral testimony to point out, in three spots, that people who did not recognize the low-sensitivity papers, or the huge disparity between the mid-tropospheric observed and modeled data, or the low sensitivity in the multiauthored Otto study (15 of the authors were lead authors in the last IPCC report), were in fact “science deniers”. [/quote]
      http://us-issues.com/2015/07/26/the-climate-wars-go-to-congress/

      This evidence completely refutes your claim, [quote]We have 400 parts per million in the atmosphere and that leads to a warming planet. [/quote] It simply has not warmed for over 18 years. This has invalidated the CAGW hypothesis.
      [quote]John Christy used the best and latest models, he used all the models available, he has graphed the period of the fastest warming and during the times humans have emitted the most CO2. This is also the best data we have. If ever any model was to show the smallest skill, this would be it. None do.[/quote]
      http://joannenova.com.au/2013/06/even-with-the-best-models-warmest-decades-most-co2-models-are-proven-failures/

      • Avatar

        JayPee

        |

        Amirlach
        Explain if you want to and regardless of what you say being indisputably true, these dopes will adhere to their dogma and ignore reality. t’s their nature,. They will never learn because they refuse to learn, What their parents and mentors told and taught them time ago will always be the eternal truth.
        That’s why he mentioned the Republican party as the enemy.
        He was taught that hate long ago, and he will not give it up, especially in the face of reason !

        • Avatar

          amirlach

          |

          Yes, but it never hurts for the others who read this, to see and understand just how in denial of reality the Alarmists really are.

          • Avatar

            JayPee

            |

            Absolutely.
            I’ve never disagreed with your posts.
            But I have agreed for different reasons.

          • Avatar

            Me

            |

            So what reasons would that be?

          • Avatar

            Me

            |

            So far Andy, is one of the best at getting his points made here, along with Gator and it wouldn’t be possible whthout this site posting it’s articles. But gator has to leave the religion thing behind him, it seems they will follow their believers before anyone else. But he doesn’t have to, All he needs to do is be himsilf. And he has said things about ahteist I have seen true. But that is the thing with religion, and I don’t buy into. If aheist are doing that, then they aren’t atheist.

          • Avatar

            William P Gloege

            |

            amirlach: Climate Deniers usually attribute what they see as false data to lies to get grants. The IPCC says about CO2 being man caused and all academies of science leading to catastrophe, All academies of science in all countries saying the same to lying to get grants. Those recognized as top climate scientists like Lovelock and Hansen say it, too. Now if someone fixed all this, he/she is a real pro. See, I have got this horse race I want to bet on. With your “fixer” expert, I figure I can make a killing. Please forward the fixer’s name. I’ll keep your confidence. Thanks.

          • Avatar

            amirlach

            |

            Who exactly are the “climate deniers”? No one denies that climate changes, or that man “makes” Co2. Peer Reviewed data clearly shows that termites emit over ten times the Co2, than all other living creatures, including man.
            https://preventdisease.com/news/10/071110_terminte_co2.shtml
            Where the problem starts is with the fraudulently “adjusted” data, the failed and invalidated models and with the complete refusal to adhere to the scientific method by so called climate science.

            As for “fixers” try these guys. The graph shows the “adjustments” made to the raw data.
            [img]http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/ushcn/ts.ushcn_anom25_diffs_urb-raw_pg.gif[/img]
            It is further analyzed here.
            http://jennifermarohasy.com/2009/06/how-the-us-temperature-record-is-adjusted/

          • Avatar

            amirlach

            |

            You seem to be firmly in the denier camp that Climatologist Dr. Pat Michaels wrote about Willy.
            And of all the leading academies of science that subscribe to the failed and invalidated CAGW Models, which have actually polled their members? Not one.

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    Climate change occurs as it always has and humans contribute to it no doubt however prophecies of catastrophic warming are demonstrably false .

    The models used to promote the overblown scam
    are consistently grossly inaccurate in one direction ,
    overstating warming .

    We are coming into or out of a ice age and the minuscule and historically current low level of CO2
    has negligible effect but let’s hope it is warming if anything at all .

    Isn’t the Arctic supposed to be ice free in the summer by now Al Gore ?

Comments are closed

No Trackbacks.