6 ms·

The fact that Angela Merkel closed down all nuclear power plants was probably a big part of the lower interest in EVs in recent year. Although they invested a l

The fact that Angela Merkel closed down all nuclear power plants was probably a big part of the lower interest in EVs in recent year. Although they invested a lot in solar and wind, the solid base of electricity generation disappeared and thus the trust in electricity for transport disappeared amongst automotive management and the population at large.

ffsm8 6mo ago
[flagged]
- actionfromafar 6mo ago
  So funny that the Green Party and Putin fit like hand in glove. Natural gas is somehow Very Good but nuclear is Very Bad.
  - badpun 6mo ago
    "It's funny because it's true". Parts of the German green movement (esp. the anti-nuclears) were actively funded by the KGB.
    - terhechte 6mo ago
      Any proof for this claim?
  - OKRainbowKid 6mo ago
    What are you talking about? Greens are neither pro-gas nor pro-Russia. They were amongst those warning previous governments of energy dependence on Russia, and were basically the most decisively pro-Ukranian party in the previous government. They also weren't the ones who made the decision to shut down the remaining nuclear plants, despite what "conservatives" would like you to believe.
- nine_k 6mo ago
  Not running on Russian gas for a few more years might have some nonlinear effects around 2022 :-/
- whiteboardr 6mo ago
  This is false. The topic was a calculated decision by her and her cabinet, based purely on fear mongering to gain voters. Blaming the green party or even calling this "woke" sounds wrong.
- luckystarr 6mo ago
  The original plan was to only shut the reactors down when enough renewable energy sources would be available to replace them. The Merkel government wanted to prolong the initially planned phase outs. Then Fukushima happened. Bad optics. So after pressure from the populace they instead of prolonging their runtime (as they wanted initially), they shut them down, but earlier than planned. Get the facts straight.
jonp888 6mo ago
"the solid base of electricity generation disappeared and thus the trust in electricity for transport disappeared" I'm sorry, but WTF? This is the most unhinged drivel about German nuclear I have ever read on HN, and that's saying something. There no problem with "trust in electricity", whatsoever, nor is there any lack of a "solid base". There has been no electricity grid collapse in Germany for decades(in stark contrast to the US, or f.e. Spain). Any problems with electrcity have been due to terrorism or building errors. Even with that, in case you haven't noticed, EV cars run on batteries and don't need constant power. Perhaps for "preppers" or people living in remote areas it would be a factor, but I have never in my life heard anyone connect the use of EV power with the power station the charging comes from or how reliable the grid is.
- sazz 6mo ago
  WTF about your understanding of the German power grid, I would say. Germany is not in a position to continuously meet its own electricity needs, but is dependent on daily aid deliveries of electricity from abroad. The electricity needs of industry cannot be met in a market-oriented manner, but taxpayers have to spend additional money so that industry can continue to produce at all. The absurdly high prices for electricity in Germany prevent any competitiveness. Ignoring all of this can only be described as WTF – what country do you actually live in?
  - jhbruhn 6mo ago
    Energy scientist in Germany here. Germany could fully supply it's national grid with German energy production. We just don't do it because it's cheaper to buy i.e. heavily subsidized nuclear power from France, or other sources. In the end, it's all markets across the whole EU - by design. Why should it not be, the European energy grid is interconnected for a reason.
    - sazz 6mo ago
      [flagged]
jhbruhn 6mo ago
Good luck modulating nuclear power plants when there is a lot of cheap renewable energy available.
- sazz 6mo ago
  ...because you don't have to modulate renewable energy?
  - patall 6mo ago
    Ideally, you have 300% renewable energy available and then modulate actual production based on demand.
    - brnt 6mo ago
      Renewable is cheap, but not that cheap. Also, solar production and heating needs are anticyclical. Also, the European grid is big (the biggest!), but not so big it can deal with seasons and weather patterns. Yet. Or ever. The idea was that gas would fill in the gaps, until energy storage at scale becomes a thing (no, it is still nowhere near scale, only gas reserves can fill that role right now). Germany is investing heavily in hydrogen to fill this gap, but barring fundamental breakthroughs, I think it's a pipe dream. A 90% (roughly) total efficiency loss means 1000% oveprovisioning of generation capacity. That's expensive, even when cheap.
- nkmnz 6mo ago
  There's no technical need to do that, because someone who can always deliver electricity would be able to struck contracts with those that always need it, i.e. heavy industry, esp. aluminum and chemistry. The reason why downregulation was necessary in the 2000s and 2010s was regulation ("Einspeisevorrang"), not technology.
  - jhbruhn 6mo ago
    If someone takes it near the power plant, and all the infrastructure is there for it. You don't build a (large) nuclear power plant just for these customers though. Generally, with a high amount of renewable but fluctuating supply, we have to get away from the base load model, towards a residual load model.

ffsm8 6mo ago

[flagged]

actionfromafar 6mo ago
So funny that the Green Party and Putin fit like hand in glove. Natural gas is somehow Very Good but nuclear is Very Bad.
- badpun 6mo ago
  "It's funny because it's true". Parts of the German green movement (esp. the anti-nuclears) were actively funded by the KGB.
  - terhechte 6mo ago
    Any proof for this claim?
- OKRainbowKid 6mo ago
  What are you talking about? Greens are neither pro-gas nor pro-Russia. They were amongst those warning previous governments of energy dependence on Russia, and were basically the most decisively pro-Ukranian party in the previous government. They also weren't the ones who made the decision to shut down the remaining nuclear plants, despite what "conservatives" would like you to believe.
nine_k 6mo ago
Not running on Russian gas for a few more years might have some nonlinear effects around 2022 :-/
whiteboardr 6mo ago
This is false. The topic was a calculated decision by her and her cabinet, based purely on fear mongering to gain voters. Blaming the green party or even calling this "woke" sounds wrong.
luckystarr 6mo ago
The original plan was to only shut the reactors down when enough renewable energy sources would be available to replace them. The Merkel government wanted to prolong the initially planned phase outs. Then Fukushima happened. Bad optics. So after pressure from the populace they instead of prolonging their runtime (as they wanted initially), they shut them down, but earlier than planned. Get the facts straight.

jonp888 6mo ago

"the solid base of electricity generation disappeared and thus the trust in electricity for transport disappeared" I'm sorry, but WTF? This is the most unhinged drivel about German nuclear I have ever read on HN, and that's saying something. There no problem with "trust in electricity", whatsoever, nor is there any lack of a "solid base". There has been no electricity grid collapse in Germany for decades(in stark contrast to the US, or f.e. Spain). Any problems with electrcity have been due to terrorism or building errors. Even with that, in case you haven't noticed, EV cars run on batteries and don't need constant power. Perhaps for "preppers" or people living in remote areas it would be a factor, but I have never in my life heard anyone connect the use of EV power with the power station the charging comes from or how reliable the grid is.

sazz 6mo ago
WTF about your understanding of the German power grid, I would say. Germany is not in a position to continuously meet its own electricity needs, but is dependent on daily aid deliveries of electricity from abroad. The electricity needs of industry cannot be met in a market-oriented manner, but taxpayers have to spend additional money so that industry can continue to produce at all. The absurdly high prices for electricity in Germany prevent any competitiveness. Ignoring all of this can only be described as WTF – what country do you actually live in?
- jhbruhn 6mo ago
  Energy scientist in Germany here. Germany could fully supply it's national grid with German energy production. We just don't do it because it's cheaper to buy i.e. heavily subsidized nuclear power from France, or other sources. In the end, it's all markets across the whole EU - by design. Why should it not be, the European energy grid is interconnected for a reason.
  - sazz 6mo ago
    [flagged]

jhbruhn 6mo ago

Good luck modulating nuclear power plants when there is a lot of cheap renewable energy available.

sazz 6mo ago
...because you don't have to modulate renewable energy?
- patall 6mo ago
  Ideally, you have 300% renewable energy available and then modulate actual production based on demand.
  - brnt 6mo ago
    Renewable is cheap, but not that cheap. Also, solar production and heating needs are anticyclical. Also, the European grid is big (the biggest!), but not so big it can deal with seasons and weather patterns. Yet. Or ever. The idea was that gas would fill in the gaps, until energy storage at scale becomes a thing (no, it is still nowhere near scale, only gas reserves can fill that role right now). Germany is investing heavily in hydrogen to fill this gap, but barring fundamental breakthroughs, I think it's a pipe dream. A 90% (roughly) total efficiency loss means 1000% oveprovisioning of generation capacity. That's expensive, even when cheap.
nkmnz 6mo ago
There's no technical need to do that, because someone who can always deliver electricity would be able to struck contracts with those that always need it, i.e. heavy industry, esp. aluminum and chemistry. The reason why downregulation was necessary in the 2000s and 2010s was regulation ("Einspeisevorrang"), not technology.
- jhbruhn 6mo ago
  If someone takes it near the power plant, and all the infrastructure is there for it. You don't build a (large) nuclear power plant just for these customers though. Generally, with a high amount of renewable but fluctuating supply, we have to get away from the base load model, towards a residual load model.