sendler2112 said:
You are not an exporter of wind turbines or solar Panels
This is not so easy to say. Germany exports a significant amount of components that are used for wind and solar power plnats, machinery to build that plants and so on. We even produce signdficant amount of raw materials like Silicon, aluminium, solar glass, materials for rotor blades etc...
If you have actual numbers of our import-export balance in both sectors feel free to link to them.
I only have this, who estimated the import quota for solar at 30% at the moment: https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/content/dam/ise/en/documents/publications/studies/recent-facts-about-photovoltaics-in-germany.pdf (page 25)
For wind I do not have actual numbers. The export quota for wind was around 60% some years ago:
https://www.erneuerbareenergien.de/archiv/windkraft-sorgt-fuer-jobs-in-deutschland-150-406-89453.html
(obviously with low installation the export quote rises and gets lower with high domestic installation, so in 2019 with Little new wind installation the export was most likely quite high)
Obviously we are a prime energy importer. What's the point about that?
From an energy import perspective the wise thing to do would burn lignite which we have in abunance. As East German did.
Current german total primary energy from wind and solar combined is 5%.
This is a nonsense number.
1kWh electricity from lignite Counts as 2,5kWh of Primary energy
1kWh of electricity from nuclear power Counts as 3kWh of Primary energy
1kWh from wind and solar is counted as 1kWh Primary energy
There is still a way to go, but switching from burning fossil fuels to RE in teh electriicty sector, witching from ICE cars to BEV and switching from burning oil nand gas to electric heat pumps will reduce the primare energy demands in each of that Segment by the factor 3.
So we do not have to increase solar+wind by the factor 20, it is much less than that
(it is also not 1/3rd, because a hydrogen economy lowers efficiency vs. using natural gas)
You still get almost twice as much energy from biomass. Much of which is imported from Sweden and the USA.
This is not true. Please Quote your sources.
There is some biomass import from US, mostly soy beans for our "meat industry" (Germany is a meat exporter)
Biomas Import from Sweden is very low
Most of the biomass imported is simply food, animal Food and construction Wood. There are some imports for energetic use like biofuels and Wood Chips, but they are far, far, far from 50% of our biomass energy.
Today the enormous meat production (and consumption) is the cause for biomass imports.
Source: https://publikationen.bibliothek.kit.edu/1000057801
The world is blowing through 17.7 TW average. 150,000 TWh per year. With the efficiency gains from a perfect electrification of all consumption we will still need half of this, Not to mention lifting up the 3 billion people who have thus far been left behind. And more beyond this to provide for the further population growth.
Yes, it is some way to go.
Today the world builds and sells roughly 70 Million cars each year.
let's say this is 100kW for each car.
So just the car industry is able to produces machinery that translates 7TW of oil into heat and power.
I'm sure that the world would be able to produce 0.5TW of solar and wind energy + the rest, if it just WANTS to do so.
Current world wind plus solar is production is 1,600 TWh.
In 2019 it was 1.404TWh of wind energy and 699TWh of solar energy, which is 2.103TWh in my calculation.
For comaprison: Nuclear power produced 2.563TWh of electricity. I do not know if this includes self cosnumption 8which is quite high in nukes) or if this is usabele net production.
https://www.worldnuclearreport.org/The-World-Nuclear-Industry-Status-Report-2019-HTML.html#_idTextAnchor011
The numbers are in a similar dimension.
Nuclear needed 50-60 years for that, solar and wind 10-20 years.
We are living right now at the peak of a one time, non-repeatable Carbon fueled energy pulse. When we move away from Carbon fuels whether by decision, or eventual depletion, access to total energy and raw materials will recede despite high tech.
If that assumption would be truw, that theer are not enough RAW materials to build a RE world, wouldn't it be wise to be the first to do it and to finish it, while all those ressorces are still avaiable?
Instead the world build 70 Million ICE cars per year, an immense waste of ressources by itself and each of that cars will burn a further 5-10 tonnes of fossil oil within ist short lifespan.
THIS is stupid.
Things will be much simpler once again in the future. The sooner we realize this and move toward it intelligently, the less painful the transition will be. Everything has to change. We are squandering our primordial energy seed corn on frivolous luxuries.
So what do you suggest for yourself? I do you wnat to live and qhat qould that trasnition look like.
I read a lot of that talk, recently in the Mical Morre anti RW film that was linked over here.
People tell mire that 2more is less". The same People that have 200m² houses, 2 ICE cars, eating meat each day and flying x-thousands miles per year.
Those People tell me that RE is not sustainable and that instead we should Focus on some "Transition".
I see a future for the world and for me living in my flat, using an BEV car (or just electric bikes), eating meat 1 per week, using 100% RE for electricity and home heating, a industry that also uses 100% RE and hydrogen and flying mybe less, but more expensive, with syntehtic carbon neutral fuel costing 3€/l vs 0,50€/l today.
That's my vision and it is doable. On a personal scale most can be done even now. Just a bit more expensive than the typical fossil fuel version, but easily doable.