Hillhater said:
Wind generators in Germany are "guaranteed" a feed in tarrif of 8€ct/kWh for 5 years, and a lower rate for the next 15 yrs.....
So who is paying the extra 4€cts ? ( hidden in taxes ?)
Again you are not up to date to the real data. They have to bid for the feed in tarif price now.
Average feed in tarif for new onshore wind power plants in Germany has been:
5.71ct/kWh in 05/2017
4.28ct/kWh in 08/2017
3.82ct/kWh in 11/2017
https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/DE/Sachgebiete/ElektrizitaetundGas/Unternehmen_Institutionen/Ausschreibungen/Wind_Onshore/BeendeteAusschreibungen/BeendeteAusschreibungen_node.html
For solar PV power plants (bigger than 750kW) average feed in tarifs have been:
6.58 ct/kWh in 05/2017
5.66 ct/kWh in 08/2017
4.91 ct/kWh in 11/2017
https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/DE/Sachgebiete/ElektrizitaetundGas/Unternehmen_Institutionen/Ausschreibungen/Solaranlagen/BeendeteAusschreibungen/Ausschreibungen2017/Ausschreibungen2017_node.html
Compare that to Hinkley C in UK which gets several times more feed in tariff for a much longer period plus inflation compensation plus the public pays for the waste.
So what do you say:
Is a solar PV plant that is able to produce at around 5ct/kWh and produces most electricity when it is need most (during daytime) a good idea or is it that expensive, non efficient nonsese that you still think about it?
In more sunnier regions large solar PV plants can now produce electricity for less than 3ct/kWh
Much of Germanys recent wind farm projects have been offshore,
No.
Installed wind capacity in Germany at the end of 2017
onshore: 50.29 GW
offshore: 5.27GW
https://www.energy-charts.de/power_inst.htm
with generation costs 2-3 times higher than onshore.
So far there was just one bid round for wind offshore yet.
Result for average feed in tariff:
0,44ct/kWh
But it really doesnt matter if it costs 4 cts or 40 cts/kWh, it is worthless if its not available 24/7 when you need it
Neither does a PV power plant produce electricity only when you Need it nor does a nuvlear power plant only produce when you need it.
This is why both Systems Need additional power plants and this is the reason why France with its large inflexible nuclear fleet has much more blackout and brownout Problems compared to Germany.
They have problems in very hot and dry summers when cooling of their nukes is compromised (not during last years because Germany is able to export lots of solar power than) and they have problems in very cold winters when they have more than 100GW demand because of electric heating.
Renewable have higher costs for the grid and for backup, storage. This is true, but it is not as significant as most belive. Up to arond 70-80% both is not very cost critical, if done well.
Above 90% share of solar and wind things get more complicated.
Ist also difficult if you get above 80% nuclear share and nuclear is NOT a good Addition to solar and wind, because it lacks flexibility, so it is a either or option, you can't have significant amounts of both.
In the end, the last 20-30% is bets proviede by natural gas power plants and after that you can think about more storage capacity or replacing natural gas with synthetic gases made from RE.
...? sounds like € 4 bn of wasted money to me. Who is getting rich from that ?.
And the extra costs for those new grid lines to facilitate RE integration is .....??????
Who is getting rich opperation a grid in your country?
spending x Billion is a matter of Efficiency. It makes no sens e to build infrastructure that is needed only for a few hours per year. better and cheaper to shut down power plants and give them compensation and pay for redespatch than otherwise. If costs rise new infrastructue is the better Option, so you have a Business case for new grids, storage, etc...
Exactly what happens.
Obviously not always perfect during transitaion periods, but the way is clear.
There is political discussion now about raising the RE electricity share goal from 50% in 2030 to 65% in 2030, because other sectors so far lack in CO2 reductions...
Last but not least: I rather spend 1 trillion for the energy transition to renewables than spend 1 trillion for a radiocative wasteland after a nuclear meltdown or pay 1 trillion for an oil war in some Middle East country.