What does Greta Thunberg allow herself?
Martin Krohn
October 13, 2022 from Kalte Sonne
It was a surprise, as the Swedish activist from Fridays-For-Future said in an interview with Sandra Maischberger . She thinks it is wrong for Germany to shut down its current nuclear power plants and burn coal instead. You don't even have to use high physics to see that the continued operation of the nuclear power plants means that a great deal of CO2 is not released into the atmosphere.
What followed after the press release about the Maischberger show? Politicians who are also in favor of extending the life of at least 3 nuclear power plants quote Greta Thunberg. But then something remarkable happened, at least in parts of the anti-nuclear movement. Instead of dealing with the topic, those who refer to Thunberg's statements are generally lumped together. You wouldn't have taken the activist seriously before, why now?
Very few voices go to the heart of Thunberg's statements. This shows a great dilemma for certain vocal protagonists. General insults to the bearers of the message instead of criticism of Greta's statements. Let's look at e.g. B. the ZDF meteorologist Özden Terli. Until the Greta quote, he rather scoffed at nuclear energy. Proponents are “Nukis”, even if that sounds almost affectionate, and at the end of the year it will all be over anyway –he thought/hoped. Thankfully, Terli has not or not yet deleted his tweet . You take care of the crises by burning more coal?!
(Image: Screenshot Twitter)
But then, shortly after the interview with Greta Thunberg:
(Image: Screenshot Twitter)
The question may be allowed, what is climate protection shit**? Burning more coal is definitely not a good idea to reduce CO2 emissions. But that is exactly what the traffic light government is doing at the moment and will do it even more in the future when more stable power generators such as nuclear power plants are taken off the grid. Even floating oil power plants in the North Sea are seriously under discussion. What would Greta say to that?
This form of argumentation, which isn't really one at all, is very common at the moment. A preoccupation with the statements of the activist does not take place, it is better to work on the bearers of her quote. What has Greta Thunberg said in the past? She said that we should "follow the science". She repeatedly referred to the IPCC reports. Now, IPCC reports are not "the science" because, strictly speaking, they don't exist that homogeneously. But let's just leave that out here. The IPCC's recommendations for action in the area of energy can be condensed into 4 statements:
1. Expand renewable energy
2. Expand nuclear power
3. Carbon capture (CCS)
4. Reforestation
Germany's policy is based on implementing just one point here. Point 2 and point 3 are even forbidden with us, point 4 would mean that the area would have to be converted. In a relatively densely populated country, the project will come up against natural limits. Overall, the discussion about this statement by Greta Thunberg is extremely weird. The same people who gave her saint status in the past will no longer care if Greta Thunberg's views collide with their own ideology. This was also the case with the topic of biomass (also known as wood burning), where the Swede has a completely different opinion than many Greens in Germany.
To make it clear again at this point: Thunberg does not otherwise rely on nuclear energy. In this case, she does not listen to the science, at least not to the recommendations of the IPCC. They just think very clearly here and far less ideologically than the Greens in Germany. Incidentally, other Greens in Scandinavia also see the issue of nuclear energy differently than their fellow party members in Germany.
The question will be when will the Greens jump over their own shadow and put the country ahead of the party. Speech texts like "We don't have a power problem" are not a solution, because reality has long since caught up with it. Constantin Zerger from the German Environmental Aid shows how blank the nerves of some opponents of nuclear power are now .
(Image: Screenshot Twitter)
Do you help the environment by not generating low-CO2 electricity? And because the arguments are running out, it is better to call for the Chancellor's authority to set guidelines. Aslant.
+++
You can sign the Stuttgart Declaration petition until Friday, October 14th, 2022. It is about the continued operation of the existing nuclear power plants in Germany. The number of drawings has increased significantly, reaching the mark of 50,000 supporters on October 12, 2022 at around 1:00 p.m. This brand is important because the Petitions Committee of the Bundestag then has to deal with it. However, there is a kind of right of withdrawal with petitions of this kind. You can basically withdraw your voice. Whether there are many submarines among the draftsmen in this case can only be guessed at. In any case, the petition would be on the safe side if the required number of subscriptions was significantly exceeded. Then vote withdrawals are probably not a problem. Click here for the petition or to subscribelong.
+++
Gigantic electricity storage: second life for coal-fired power plants. Something was deliberately left out of the headline of an article from Deutschlandfunk. The author wrote “great idea” in advance. First of all, he explains the principle:
“Converting excess wind and solar power into heat and then converting it back into electricity sounds like a losing proposition, and it is. It would only make sense in
combination with a huge heat storage tank that would always be filled when the sun and wind were supplying plenty of electricity. At night and when there is no wind, the stored heat could then drive the turbine of the former coal-fired power plant, generating electricity and thereby avoiding supply bottlenecks.”
After that, he realizes that such a business obviously doesn't make economic sense, which is why a project in Hamburg was discontinued. So not a great idea after all?
“Excess wind power powers a fan heater. It blows hot air into the stones and heats them up to 800 degrees Celsius. To get the energy back, the fan blows cold air into the storage tank. It is heated by the stones, flows into a neighboring building and generates electricity there via a turbine. Testing began in 2019. According to the operator, they were technically successful. Nevertheless, Siemens Gamesa stopped the project at the beginning of 2022. The reason: It is currently not conceivable to operate such a stone storage facility economically. A setback for the concept of giving coal-fired power plants a second life.”
+++
In September 2022, Prof. Dr. Maximilian Fichtner from the Helmholtz Institute Ulm gave a lecture on the subject of battery storage on the occasion of the Petersberg Talks . He assumes a positive development in the production of sustainable batteries.
+++
Falling prices for LPG in winter? According to Spiegel , that could actually happen.
"The fact that China is no longer bidding for the spot market is great because there is one less party to fight for the cargo," said Alex Siow, senior gas and LNG analyst at ICIS in Asia . "The reduction in its gas demand means that China has signed too many contracts for LNG," Siow said.
Analysts from JLC, SIA Energy and Rystad Energy assume that China's total gas consumption will remain constant this year or even fall by two percent to around 370 billion cubic meters. That is the slowest growth since at least 2002. LNG imports also fell as Europe pulled cargo out of the region to replenish stocks following the Russian disruptions, fueling price developments. China is therefore producing more gas in its own country. The country is also receiving more gas from Russia, both via pipelines and in the form of LNG supplies.”
+++
Reader post from Paul Schwedtke:
"We don't freeze for your politics". I think so. Even if the traffic light stops at €200 billion. Can money replace electricity and heat?
Why doesn't the traffic light release shale gas and buy fracking gas from the USA at inflated prices? Why does Mr. Habeck hesitate to continue nuclear power? Probably only until the Lower Saxony elections. After that, Lingen will continue. The three nuclear power plants that were shut down nine months ago would have needed a perspective half a year ago. Instead, we use extremely expensive gas to generate electricity.
Showing all our energy options in March would have allowed for a different course: because business is 50% psychology.
+++
Reader's mail from Dipl. Ing. Martin Krohn:
Subject: False alarm, lawsuit against classification of gas and nuclear energy
Ladies and Gentlemen
some comments on the blog of 10/12/22. It reports on the latest actions of the "last generation". These triggered the fire alarm in the Reichstag in Berlin, prompting the deployment of several fire brigades to the Reichstag. The report asked what would happen if the fire brigade was really needed elsewhere. This can cause serious injury
or even death to people. The "last generation" does not seem to think about such problems. Sticking to roads with superglue may also impede the passage of emergency vehicles (fire brigade, ambulance). There was once a statement that such emergency vehicles would be allowed through, but how is that supposed to work? Would the activists use force to remove the tape from the street and risk injuring themselves in the process? That is probably not to be expected. When will the state finally take tougher action? What happens if people really get hurt in such an action? That will come sooner or later. Harder penalties are finally needed against the activists. Another article reports that Austria has filed a lawsuit against the classification of gas and nuclear power as climate-friendly before the European Court of Justice. In doing so, the state shows absolute selfishness. Due to its location, Austria can generate a larger amount of energy from hydropower. However, the possibility does not exist for a large number of other European countries. A supply of only wind and sun does not allow a secure energy supply. Other ways of generating electricity are absolutely necessary. This requires additional power plants in most countries. However, Austria cannot supply most of Europe with electricity from its own hydropower either. Other power plants are therefore required, and nuclear and gas power plants are ideal for this.