German energy giant RWE has begun dismantling a wind farm to make way for a further expansion of an open-pit lignite coal mine in the western region of North Rhine Westphalia.

I thought renewables were cheaper than coal. How is this possible?

  • RagnarokOnline@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think this headline is misleading.

    A better headline might read: “Coal found beneath wind farm. Turbines dismantled to make room for mining operation.”

      • RagnarokOnline@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I originally read it as “Germany says ‘Fuck wind as an alternative energy source’ and begins reverting back to coal”, so I figured I’d clarify in case anyone end thought the same thing.

        Doesn’t seem like this article indicates that Germans is giving up on alternative energy.

        Edit: corrected dumb spelling mistake.

  • Onihikage@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The linked article is two sentences long and offers no context or understanding of the situation. It might as well be a headline. The only useful part of it is the photo of the wind farm being dismantled, which also shows a completely different wind farm in the background, on the other side of the expanding mine, that is not being dismantled:

    But you wouldn’t realize that just from reading the article.

    My understanding based on this much better article from Recharge News is that the following information is critical to understanding this decision:

    First, the wind farm being dismantled is the Keyenberg-Holzweiler wind farm, which consists of 8 turbines built over 20 years ago in 2001, totaling just over 10 MW of capacity (1.3 MW each). Recently constructed wind turbine power outputs are estimated at a 42% capacity factor, which is to say they generate about 42% of the peak power they’re rated for because wind isn’t always blowing; this would likely be lower for the older wind farm, but we’ll use the current amount. The 10 MW wind farm would have made 3 GWh per month, which based on an average of 893 kWh per month per household is enough to power… 3386 homes [edit: corrected my horrible math]. Not nothing, but not a lot by modern standards considering the Chinese just built a single wind turbine that outdoes the entire Keyenberg-Holzweiler wind farm by half and then some.

    Furthermore, as the turbines were built 20 years ago, they were always going to be decommissioned around this time, and that’s documented in the agreements back then under which the turbines were built. RWE continues to construct many turbines elsewhere, claiming 7.2 GW of turbines are currently under construction, 720 times the rated output of the Keyenberg-Holzweiler wind farm. They’ve also built 200 MW of wind capacity in that locality, likely what we see in the background of that image.

    If RWE were to replace the turbines that are being decommissioned, the coal underneath them will be worthless by the time the new turbines are decommissioned, and it’s supposedly the last of the coal they will be allowed to dig up. They’ve clearly made huge investments in building out wind power, so this represents the last vestiges of cleaning up their act.

    I could not advocate more strongly that coal should be left in the ground, but this all comes down to corporate investors who care more about money than the environment, and agreements made 20 years ago, as well as the fact Germany and much of the EU is still desperate for any source of energy to maintain their current level of industry right now while they’re still building out carbon-free generation to fully replace coal/oil/gas. Reality is complex, and to me this isn’t as big of an insult to clean energy advocacy as the microscopic EUObserver “article” could lead one to think it is.

    Coal is still dying in the West, so let’s not go thinking this one last gasp means that trend has changed. If we’re lucky, and demand for coal falls quickly enough, they might even scrap this mine before they’ve gotten everything out of it. Keep pushing!

  • suction@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Delete this InfoWars-level bs misinformation meant to smear clean energy.

    One small privately owned wind farm is being disassembled, this is not a general new policy or anything signalling a shift away from clean energy.

  • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Didn’t the green party in Germany have power in government right now? And weren’t they the same guys who dismantled their nuclear plants?

    I’m not very informed on German politics but if the answer to both was yes they should really rename their green party to the coal party.

    • napoleonsdumbcousin@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The original contract with the company RWE was made in the 1990s and included destroying whole towns for the coal mine, which was planned to be in use until 2038.

      What we see now is a compromise between RWE, the state of North Rhine-Westphalia and the federal government to save the remaining towns and close the mine earlier (in 2030). The wind turbines are from 2001 and are nearing the end of their lifecycle.

      • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why not introduce a coal tax of 1million per ton, no need to modify the contract at all. If they want to pay 1million per ton to mine the coal, RWE is more then welcome to do so. It is their legal right after all.

        • rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          This would likely end up hurting consumers more than RWE, because the “merit order” pricing system sets electricity prices depending on the production cost of the most expensive unit of electricity that is being consumed at a given time (usually coal). So raising the production cost of coal-based electricity sadly will also raise electricity prices, so long as renewables don’t take over a larger share of the market.

          • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I mean of course it would hurt consumer absent government intervention, that is the design of the market system. Socialize costs, privatize the profits. But it doesn’t HAVE to be that way if Germany actually wanted to go green.

  • JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Cmon Germany I wanna root for you so bad because of your pro-consumer laws but blunders like this and the nuke plants keep making it so damn hard.

    • andrai@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The contract for RWE to expand the mine there goes back decades and the wind farm operator knew it would be demolished before they build it. It’s at the end of its life cycle now and had to be demolished one way or another.

      German government could either breach their contract with RWE and pay them compensation or allow the destruction of a derelict wind park in exchange of RWE stopping coal extraction 8 years earlier then planned. It’s a job well done by the government.

      • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They are the Government, they can just shut down coal immediately by law. Make all coal extraction immediately illegal, sue RWE for climate destruction, throw the executives in jail. Save the planet.

  • emmanuel_car@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    12ft paywall removed link

    The demolitions are part of a deal brokered last year between Robert Habeck, the Green party’s minister for economy and climate action and Mona Neubaur, who is the economy minister for North Rhine Westphalia, to allow the expansion of the mine.

    In return, RWE had to agree to phase out coal in 2030, eight years before the previous deadline. “It’s a good day for climate protection,” Habeck said at the time.

    What’s the timeline for getting this expansion built? And what’s the lifecycle of the plant? I understand there are energy scarcity concerns, but how is this the most economical option when it’s ~7 years until they’re supposed to phase out coal?

    • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I suspect that they have no intention of phasing out coal, or there are certain unrealistic requirements that have to be met before the “agreement” to end coal is enforced. It’s just pageantry, Germany has no intention of ending coal dependence.

      • SeventyTwoTrillion [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        the only people trivializing fascism are those who see fascism symbology like the swastika, Black Sun, various nordic runes, etc on the soldiers they’re egging on and go “doesn’t look like anything to me!” while advocating for the double genocide theory

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Have you any pictures of Azov with swastika, black sun, or such after they got integrated into the national guard?

          Or is that just a convenient propaganda line to make you support an imperial aggressor fielding tons of fascist militias, itself being a mafia state slowly but surely turning fascist?

          • AcidSmiley [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Have you any pictures of Azov with swastika, black sun, or such since 2014?

            The Black Sun and Wolfsangel have been right on their fucking shit rag of a flag until last year, you fascist turd.

            JFC the entire first page of your comments is nothing but nazi apologia, fick dich du kranke Faschosau.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              The black sun got removed in 2015, this is the new one. But, go on, spin random bullshit.

              JFC the entire first page of your comments is nothing but nazi apologia

              Yeah I happen to be arguing with another fascism-trivialising hexbear idiot in another thread.

              • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Oh and I can prove Azov are still distributing this free taster archive of the magazine via nackor.org, which is where the previous azov.press site migrated to later on. Here is a January 2022 archived page where you can see Azov are still giving away that selection of the magazine for free via their political spinoff the “National Corps”, this is one of several of their party websites: https://web.archive.org/web/20220409062917/https://nackor.org/ru/z-dnem-sobornosti-ukraini

                Reference for National Corps being directly linked to Azov: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/13/ukraine-far-right-national-militia-takes-law-into-own-hands-neo-nazi-links

                It is the regiment’s official political wing and has only suspended political activity during wartime.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  nackor.org, which is where the previous azov.press site migrated to later on.

                  nackor.org is a gambling website now it seems. Certainly not a news outlet, certainly not from the outside.

                  Reference for National Corps being directly linked to Azov

                  Wikipedia. Yes they’re certainly linked the National Corps is the home of Azov’s Nazis.

                  …squinting at things and considering that National Corps ceased activity in 2022 (to go to the front) it doesn’t seem too unlikely that they gave up on nackor.org and the successor to the Black Sun. I guess (really, guess) that it was run by National Corps for the longest time after Azov got integrated.

                  Anyhow are you seeing those election results. I can’t blame Ukrainians for not being too worried about them getting into power.

            • Adkml [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Hey rember when they just got those new leopard tanks and some rascal painted a bunch of iron crosses on them, which libs insisted was from obscure world War 1 battalion and not where literally everybody knows the iron cross from, to the point the German government said they weren’t gonna keep giving them weapons if that shit didn’t stop

  • A2PKXG@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s about density. Renewables Are great, but not on terms of value add per square foot. The coal under the wind mill is worth orders of magnitude more than the windmill.

    And, it’s not as bad as it sounds. In general, the number of windmills keeps increasing.

    • UlrikHD@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you care about energy density, nuclear is the best solution, not coal. I guess Germans don’t care though

  • DessertStorms@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ban straws! (even though disabled people need them and they create negligible pollution)

    Replace your car with an electric one! (even though it still works fine and will end up in landfill, never mind the environmental cost of producing the new one, or the source of the electricity it uses)

    Reduce your carbon footprint! (even though its a term we invented ourselves to shift responsibility to you, while we fly our private jets around creating more pollution than you ever could in 10 lifetimes)

    Recycle! (even though 90% of it ends up in landfill anyway because we don’t want to pay to actually recycle it)

    All equates to

    Look the other way while we continue to rape the planet and blame it on you!!!

    Never forget - capitalists (and the governments they’re co-dependent on) only want more money, they don’t car about you or me or the planet, only about themsleves and the numbers in their accounts, and they will never willingly stop doing whatever it takes to make more.

    • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      or the source of the electricity it uses

      Oh, quit this noise. In the same countries where electric cars are becoming common, wind/water/sun-produced energy is also on the rise. Electric cars decouple the energy used from the means of production in ways that gasoline will never have, and the potential outweighs the temporary conditions of power generation in socially backward areas like Darfur and America.

    • smollittlefrog@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Luckily many people live in democracies where they can simply vote to enact climate policies.

      Sadly most people living in those democracies choose to continue enabling climate change.

      The reason nothing is being done against climate change isn’t corrupt politicians. It’s the millions of people voting for them.

      • DessertStorms@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Lol, no.

        The fault lies with those who built and benefit from the system, not those trapped in it who are merely given the illusion of choice.

        Get off your high horse and aim your anger at the right people, otherwise all you are doing is enabling their rigged system.

        • smollittlefrog@lemdro.id
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Your first link is US only, your second link is about a completely seperate issue. You don’t need to dismantle capitalism to protect the climate.

          In Germany, where I live, the voters could easily vote for the greens “Grüne” and the left “Linke”.

          If those two parties had a majority in government, we’d have a climate friendly system in no time.

          But they don’t. We had a conservative government for 16 years. Now we have a center government, which sadly includes the small government / free market party “FDP”, blocking all significant progress.

          No systemic oppression stops people from voting Left/Greens. But they never did, and never will.

          There’s now an uprise of the far right party “AfD” in Germany, to the point it’s becoming one of the major parties.

          In Germany people have the choice readily available to stop actively damaging the climate.

          But every couple of years, they freely choose to not do that.

          I feel like many left-wing people regularly forget about the billions of people who genuinely do not care to do anything about climate change.

          • Harrison [He/Him]@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Under capitalism, the capitalist class controls the media, and can use their wealth to control the political class.

            A democracy can only make choices so far as it’s voters are informed, and when a group controls most sources of information, it can control the democracy as a whole.

          • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You don’t need to dismantle capitalism to protect the climate.

            You absolutely do. If it was profitable to destroy the envrionment capitalism would do it in a heartbeat. And guess what it IS profitable to destroy the environment, that is why it is happening! You cannot protect the environment under capitalism.

            • smollittlefrog@lemdro.id
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You can limit capitalism without abolishing it.

              In Germany people are guaranteed 20/24 paid vacation days. That’s not profitable.

              That’s a limit imposed on capitalism. It can be done and has been done without abolishing capitalism.

              That’s just one of the thousands of policies that limit capitalism.

              You can limit capitalism (as literally every capitalist nation does) without abolishing it.

              Enforcing climate friendlyness would be just another limit.

              • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                When you try to limit capitalism you get nuclear plants being shut down and coal plants being opened and the environment still being destroyed.

      • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        No they can’t? If it was as simple as voting for green policies we’d see more of them. The only thing people can do is vote for greenwashed policies that do not impact the bottom line of industry.