It has for many years been a tenet of the Progressive religion that solar and wind power must replace fossil fuels as the source of supply for our energy-hungry civilization. Critics of the idea have said all along that this is an impossible dream, a colossal waste of resources, is destructive to the environment in rarely mentioned ways, that it makes the West dependent upon suppliers of exotic materials, and is a moral error besides.
Germany, which has wasted hundreds of billions of euros on this “faith-based initiative”, is now learning these lessons the hard way. A recent report at the Canada Free Press tells the story in depressing detail. I won’t excerpt it here — you should read it all — but I’ll offer a brief summary.
Above all, there’s the inconstancy of sun and wind. When they are strong, Germany’s solar generators and wind farms produce so much energy in such a short time that there’s no way for the German grid to absorb it. This means that Germany has to unload the temporary excess to other countries — who don’t want it, and must be paid to take it. This cost is passed along to German consumers. Sometimes the overproduction is so high that the solar and wind facilities have to be ordered to shut down. When this happens, the operators of those facilities (which were built with lavish government subsidies in the first place), are reimbursed for their downtime. Once again, the cost is passed along to the consumer (or to the taxpayer, which amounts to the same thing).
When wind and sun are weak, as often happens, commercial consumers must be told to reduce their usage, slowing industrial production. They quite rightly insist on being compensated for this, which they are — and once again, consumers foot the bill. If sun and wind fall short for any length of time, however, fossil-fuel plants have to be fired up to cover the gap. This is an extremely inefficient use of these facilities, and makes for greater CO2 emissions than if they’d just been chugging along full-time as before (that is, back when they easily and reliably supplied Germany’s electrical demand). This inefficiency means the electricity they create is far more expensive than it otherwise would be, a surplus cost that is, once again, borne by the ordinary German citizen — who can at this point be heard groaning, off in the distance, in a gigantic steam-powered lemon-squeezer.
There’s more to this depressing little parable, but now you must go and read the article. You can do so here.
Update: In response to comments, I’ve looked up the actual cost of electricity for German households. It is about €0.295 per kilowatt hour, nearly three times the average cost in the U.S. (which at current exchange rates is about €0.11).
This of course wouldn’t include the costs absorbed by the German government (i.e., by the German taxpayer).
We should note also that it seems that an overwhelming majority of Germans think the extra cost is worth it. Here, for example, is an article putting that number at an astonishing 95%.
Why? For religious reasons, of course:
“People in Germany know the deployment must continue so we can fulfil our obligations regarding climate protection and future generations…’
In other words: salvation through atonement. The “deployment”, however sweetly painful, “must continue” — until our sin is washed away.
As I’ve written elsewhere:
In the beginning, there was only God.
From God arose Man.
Before his Fall, Man lived simply, and in perfect harmony with God. It was a Paradise on Earth.
Then a disaster happened. Man acquired a new kind of Knowledge: knowledge that he did not need, but that conferred upon him enormous temptation. In his unwisdom, and against God’s wishes, Man succumbed. His new Knowledge gave him great power, but at a terrible cost: he had turned his back on God, and his Paradise was lost. In his exile, he would wield his ill-gained power in prideful suffering and woe.
But then came a Messenger, offering the possibility of Redemption: if Man were to renounce his awful Knowledge, and learn once again to surrender himself to the love of God, he would be forgiven, and could find his way back to Paradise. It would not be easy ”” it would require that he make terrible sacrifices, atone for his many sins, and give up his worldly comforts and much that he had come to love ”” but if his faith was strong, his Salvation could become a reality, and he could once again live in Paradise, in sweet communion with God.
In order to move from the old religion to the new one, we need only substitute “Nature’ for “God’ in the passages above.
9 Comments
I used to think that the lure of high speed rail when none was present was the promise of Lefty utopians. Maybe sunshine and wind are just too hard to resist as opposed to good old steel and lumber.
Honestly, part of the problem is that Germany just isn’t that sunny, and doesn’t have constant wind. Solar power is much more feasible in, say, the Mojave desert, and wind-power works great in West Texas or the North Atlantic where wind is fairly predictable. Also, solar and wind would be much more economical if our battery technology improved. Of course, neither of them hold a candle to nuclear as “clean” sources of energy, but nuclear has a horrible reputation and has very high up-front costs, so won’t ever be seriously considered.
Fossil fuels: abundant, cheap, portable, reliable, safe, and energy-dense.
I wish the article had included an example of a typical German consumer electrical bill, so pine could see the retail price per kilowatt hour and so forth.
Handle,
You’re right: the article should have included that information. I’ve just done some poking around on my own (which didn’t take long), and updated the post.
Meanwhile, nearby France has cheap, dependable, safe and (for those who care) carbon-free Nuclear Power.
It’s not that f hard.
Since you’re answering reader questions I got one too.
That “steam powered lemon squeezer” you’ve mentioned up above – that just a useful turn of phrase or can somebody actually get one on say, Amazon?
I’m just betting if I could get one of those into the kitchen I might be able to keep the grandkids off their smartphones long enough to have a “meaningful conversation.”
JK, that turn of phrase was lifted, quite shamelessly, from Mencken (whose fans I hoped would get the reference).
By way of atonement I will give you the original, which describes Harry Hopkins and his colleagues hatching the New Deal:
.
Look up south Australian electricity prices…if you dare.