Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Energie Alternative

Davos. Riunione di nobili decaduti senza terra e denari. Le defezioni aumentano.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-01-20.

2018-11-25__davos 001

Il Meeting di Davos ricorda da vicino la riunione dei nobili decaduti, sotto la terza arcata del ponte sull’Elba a Dresden. Le prime due arcate erano state occupate da migranti in via di integrazione.

Si vedevano, si salutavano con la deferenza dovuta al titolo, si chiedevano vicendevolmente, con tutto garbo e stile da noblesse oblige: “Ma Lei signor Visconte, ha portato qualcosa da mangiare?”.

La riunione si sciolse poco prima del tramonto, non senza essersi divise le zone dove poter rovistare nei cassonetti alla ricerca di un qualcosa di commestibile.

*

Eppure fino al 2015 i titoli di Davos erano roboanti.

There’s A Plan Floating Around Davos To Spend $90 Trillion Redesigning All The Cities So They Don’t Need Cars

«That is one of the more ambitious (and possibly outlandish) ideas knocking around the World Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland, this morning. The Davos meeting is the annual conclave of the world’s ruling class: presidents and prime ministers, CEOs, and religious figures (and the thousands of journalists who follow them, hoping for a soundbite or two).

The $90 trillion cities proposal came from former vice president Al Gore and former president of Mexico Felipe Calderon, and their colleagues on the The Global Commission on the Economy and Climate. That group hopes to persuade the world’s leaders to do something about humanity’s suicidal effort to heat the Earth’s climate. ….»

*

The 2018 Report of the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate

«We are significantly under-estimating the benefits of cleaner, climate-smart growth. Bold climate action could deliver at least US$26 trillion in economic benefits through to 2030, compared with business-as-usual. There are real benefits to be seen in terms of new jobs, economic savings, competitiveness and market opportunities, and improved well-being for people worldwide.»

* * * * * * *

Si parlava con nonchalance non di milioni, e nemmeno di miliardi, bensì di trilioni di dollari americani. Un trilione equivale a mille miliardi.

Partnerships for better growth and a better climate.

«The Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, and its flagship project The New Climate Economy, were set up to help governments, businesses and society make better-informed decisions on how to achieve economic prosperity and development while also addressing climate change.

The New Climate Economy was commissioned in 2013 by the governments of seven countries: Colombia, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Norway, South Korea, Sweden and the United Kingdom. The Commission has operated as an independent body and has been given full freedom to reach its own conclusions. Lead by its global commission, it has disseminated its messages by engaging with heads of governments, finance ministers, business leaders and other key economic decision-makers in over 30 countries around the world.»

* * * * * * *

Mr Al Gore avrebbe voluto spendere 90 trilioni, poi scesi 26 trilioni. Tutti denari che avrebbero dovuto essere prelevati dalla tasche dei Cittadini Contribuenti, per transitare in quelle dei liberal, democratici negli Stati Uniti e socialisti in Europa.

Ben si comprendo gli urli di dolore che si stanno levando di questi tempi!

* * * * * * *

Eccovi il report odierna di Sky tg24.

«Una globalizzazione 4.0 che funzioni e sia inclusiva e sostenibile. Una governance internazionale efficace. Il rilancio dell’agenda climatica. Sono questi i temi principali del Wef 2019. A spiegarli è lo stesso Klaus Schwab: “Nella società attuale, una ulteriore integrazione mondiale è inevitabile e i modelli esistenti di governance globale hanno difficoltà a promuovere azioni concrete fra le potenze mondiali”. “Questa quarta ondata della globalizzazione deve essere centrata sull’uomo”, aggiunge Schwab che ha anche invitato i leader presenti al summit a trovare “l’immaginazione e l’impegno necessari”, per affrontare “un periodo di profonda instabilità globale portata dall’impatto della quarta rivoluzione industriale, dal riallineamento delle dinamiche geo-economiche e delle forze geopolitiche”. ….»

Tra i grandi della Terra assenti Trump, Macron, Xi

«Quest’anno alla conferenza manca Donald Trump, ospite d’onore arrivato nel 2018 da rockstar. Il tycoon aveva già anticipato la sua assenza a causa della questione Shutdown negli Stati Uniti. Per lo stesso motivo è stata cancellata la partecipazione dell’intera delegazione della Casa Bianca: era previsto l’arrivo del segretario di stato Mike Pompeo e il segretario al Tesoro Steven Mnuchin. Da sottolineare anche le assenze di Ivanka Trump, figlia del tycoon, e del genero Jared Kushner. Mancherà anche Xi Jinping, primo presidente cinese presente al Wef che nel 2017 lanciò una controffensiva a suo modo globalista. Impegnato sul fronte gilet gialli, anche il presidente francese Emmanuel Macron sarà assente a Davos.»

*

Le idee di Mr Trump sul ‘clima’ dovrebbero essere note: del tutto normale che non perda tempo andando a Davos.

Il forfeit di Mr Xi è urente.

Dapprima annuncia che la Cina aumenterà del 25% la quota di energia elettrica generata bruciando carbone:

Carbone. Consumi mondiali. I numeri parlano chiaro. La Cina.

Quindi annuncia che la Cina cesserà le sovvenzioni alle energie alternative: sono un fallimento economico.

Cina. Energie alternative solo se più economiche. Fine delle sovvenzioni.

Infine, manda a Davos il suo vice, che vi sarà nell’intermezzo della visita in Svizzera:

Cina. Davos. Sarà presente Mr Wang Qishan, vice presidente cinese.

*

Una sconsolata Cnn  annuncia che anche Ms May se ne guarda bene di andare a Davos.

Theresa May is skipping Davos, citing Brexit

* * *

Ma mica che sia finita qui. Persino l’inclito Mr Macron non attenderà i lavori di Davos: lui che si era proclamato l’erede universale del ‘clima’, che avrebbe portato avanti la sua battaglia per la vittoria finale del ‘clima’.

Ma, Vi ricordate che cosa aveva detto?

Macron. Ricordiamo cosa disse un anno fa a Davos.

Bene. Sono bastate qualche decina di migliaia di lebbrosi, Gilets Jauns, che gli hanno messo a soqquadro la Francia a causa delle imposte sul carburante e che adesso reclamano la sua testa.

Da autoproclamato imperatore del mondo si è trasformato nel recluso nell’Eliseo, che non osa nemmeno di andare a far visita in carcere al beneamato Benalla che pur tanto si è prodigato per lui.

*

Resta l’immarcescibile Frau Merkel, l’anatra zoppa di Europa, che si abbracccia a mr Macron, barcollante sotto il peso del distacco da Mr Benalla.

Il 24 gennaio 2018 aveva detto:

Merkel Davos: Trump impari dalla storia.

«Abbiamo bisogno di un’Unione europea sempre più integrata”, dall’unione bancaria alla difesa comune. Ha aggiunto la Merkel tornando a esprimere rammarico per il voto britannico a favore della Brexit, ma allo stesso tempo notando come il progetto europeo sia “chiaramente incoraggiato dall’elezione del presidente francese Emmanuel Macron, che ha dato all’Unione nuovo impeto che ci rafforzerà.

“Abbiamo bisogno di un’ Unione europea sempre più integrata”, dall’unione bancaria alla difesa comune. Ha aggiunto la Merkel tornando a esprimere rammarico per il voto britannico a favore della Brexit, ma allo stesso tempo notando come il progetto europeo sia “chiaramente incoraggiato dall’elezione del presidente francese Emmanuel Macron, che ha dato all’Unione nuovo impeto che ci rafforzerà” ….

La Francia sarà “un modello nella lotta contro il cambiamento climatico”. Emmanuel Macron ha imbracciato la bandiera ambientalista di fronte alla platea del Forum di Davos. “Stiamo perdendo la battaglia. Nel 2020, se non saremo in grado di presentare dei risultati, cosa diremo alla gente?

Fortunatamente non avete invitato nessuno scettico rispetto al riscaldamento globale quest’anno

La Francia e tornata al centro dell’Europa”, dice poi Macron, “non vi sarà un successo francese senza un successo europeo»

* * * * * * *

Su queste basi, oramai Davos è diventata quasi innocua.

Homo sine pecunia est imago mortis.

Annunci
Pubblicato in: Cina, Devoluzione socialismo, Energie Alternative

Cina. Energie alternative solo se più economiche. Fine delle sovvenzioni.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-01-16.

cina

L’annuncio dato dalla Cina è sobrio, esaustivo e sembrerebbe essere con i piedi bene sulla terra.

China: No Wind Or Solar If It Can’t Beat Coal On Price

«China has said it will not approve wind and solar power projects unless they can compete with coal power prices.

Beijing pulled the plug on support for large solar projects, which had been receiving a per kWh payment, in late May. That news came immediately after the country’s largest solar industry event and caught everyone by surprise.

Officials are understood to have been frustrated at seeing Chinese suppliers and engineering firms building solar projects overseas that delivered electricity at prices far below what was available back home.

The country also has its own issues with grid logjams. These have caused power from wind and solar projects to be wasted due to a lack of capacity on the network to transmit and distribute it. In 2017 12% of wind generation and 6% of solar was curtailed.

In the plans announced on Thursday, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), the top strategic planning authority, and the National Energy Administration (NEA) set out a series of conditions under which new solar and wind projects would be approved from now till the end of 2020.

Chief among these is that the price matches or undercuts the national coal benchmark, something that happened for the first time ever just last month.

Projects will also have to show that the grid can handle their output. Technical specifications will ensure that the highest standards are met on that front.

Local governments have been told they are free to offer their own subsidies to projects if they wish.

In the past, provincial authorities have spent heavily to bankroll uncompetitive solar manufacturers. Thursday’s announcement warned that any attempt to use project subsidies to invest in “local factories” or to make the use of locally made components a condition of the subsidy.

Also included in the wide-ranging changes is the introduction of a green certificate scheme. A small trial of such a scheme was undertaken in 2017. It would work in a similar way to renewable energy certificates schemes in the U.S. and elsewhere. A certificate is created for each unit of electricity generated. These are then traded among utilities who may have targets to meet as determined by regulators or purchased by an end user to demonstrate their use of “clean” power. Details on the mechanics of the certificate scheme have not yet been released.»

Riassumiamo.

«China has said it will not approve wind and solar power projects unless they can compete with coal power prices»

*

«Beijing pulled the plug on support for large solar projects»

*

«The country also has its own issues with grid logjams. These have caused power from wind and solar projects to be wasted due to a lack of capacity on the network to transmit and distribute it. In 2017 12% of wind generation and 6% of solar was curtailed.»

*

«Projects will also have to show that the grid can handle their output»

*

«Projects will also have to show that the grid can handle their output. Technical specifications will ensure that the highest standards are met on that front.»

* * * * * * * *

Se è vero che la corrente elettrica è prodotta nelle centrali, sarebbe altrettanto vero ricordare come da queste debba essere portata ai consumatori tramite gli elettrodotti, che dissipano energia.

Il costo deve essere contabilizzato su quanto alla fine arriva al consumatore.

Non solo, ma si deve anche tener conto del costo di impianto, di manutenzione e di rinnovo.

In linea generale, più le centrali sono piccole e sparpagliate e minore è la necessità di disporre di reti a lunga percorrenza: maggiore la lunghezza dell’elettrodotto, maggiore la dispersione

Della corrente eolica prodotta sul Baltico ne arriva in Baviera, luogo di consumo industriale, appena il 50%. Questo vuol dire raddoppiare i costi per kwh.

Infine, e cosa non da poco, l’eolico produce corrente solo quando tira vento ed il solare solo quando c’è il sole.

Queste centrali entrano in produzione a capriccio meteorologico, non dietro esplicita richiesta dei consumatori.

Per ultimo ma non certo per ultimo, quando queste centrali alternative entrano in funzione immettono grandi quantità di energia nel grid, che se ne va regolarmente in sovraccarico.

* * * * * * * *

L’arte di saper fare di conto non è poi impresa impossibile.


Climate Dispatch. 2019-01-12. China: No More Wind Or Solar If It Can’t Beat Coal On Price

China has said it will not approve wind and solar power projects unless they can compete with coal power prices. Beijing pulled the plug on support for large solar projects, which had been receiving a per kWh payment, in late May. That news came immediately after the country’s largest solar industry event and caught everyone by surprise. –John Parnell, Forbes, 10 January 2018

Shares in China’s new energy vehicle (NEV) makers and other firms in the industry chain are pummelled, after media reports that Beijing this year could continue to cut subsidies for NEVs. —The Economic Times, 9 January 2019

Saudi Arabia is nearing a deal to invest in U.S. liquefied natural gas, a landmark decision for the kingdom, which in the past had been a huge supplier of energy to America. America’s shale revolution has broken years of dependence on Middle Eastern oil, to the extent that the International Energy Agency expects the U.S. to become a net energy exporter by 2023. —The Wall Street Journal, 9 January 2019

China National Petroleum Company (CNPC) reported that shale gas production from its Sichuan Basin project increased by 40% between 2017 and 2018. Total gas output was pegged at 4.27 billion cubic meters (bcm), with a daily output amounting to 20 million cubic meters (mcm). The figures are record highs, the company said. —JPT Digital, 10 January 2019

Support in German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s coalition for a major new Russian gas pipeline is slipping as frustration with the Kremlin’s brinkmanship grows and pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump starts to bite. —Bloomberg, 7 January 2019

BP discovers 1 billion barrels of oil at its Thunder Horse field in the Gulf of Mexico. The oil giant also says it will spend $1.3 billion to develop the third phase of its Atlantis offshore field south of New Orleans. BP credits its investment in advanced seismic technology for speeding up its ability to confirm the discoveries. —CNBC, 8 January 2019

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Energie Alternative, Problemia Energetici

Carbone. Consumi mondiali. I numeri parlano chiaro. La Cina.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-01-14.

2019-01-09__carbone__001

«Weak demand in Europe and China along with ramping up of global output from recent capacity additions and upgrades will be the main overhang for EU coal prices next year»

*

«EU coal for 2019 increased 1.7% through Dec. 21»

*

«Coal use faces more headwinds from the EU’s emissions market. Carbon allowances tripled this year and are forecast to jump again in 2019 when market reforms to reduce a glut kick in next year»

*

«The story of coal is a tale of two worlds with climate action policies and economic forces leading to closing coal power plants in some countries, while coal continues to play a part in securing access to affordable energy in others»

* * * * * * * *

2019-01-09__carbone__002

La manfrina del carbone continua imperterrita.

Satellite images show ‘runaway’ expansion of coal power in China

«Extra 259GW capacity from coal in pipeline despite Beijing’s restrictions on plants. ….

Chinese coal-fired power plants, thought to have been cancelled because of government edicts, are still being built and are threatening to “seriously undermine” global climate goals, researchers have warned.

Satellite photos taken in 2018 of locations in China reveal cooling towers and new buildings that were not present a year earlier at plants that were meant to stop operations or be postponed by orders from Beijing.

The projects are part of an “approaching tsunami” of coal plants that would boost China’s existing coal capacity by 25% …. The total capacity of the planned coal power stations is about 259GW, bigger than the American coal fleet and “wildly out of line” with the Paris climate agreement

This new evidence that China’s central government hasn’t been able to stop the runaway coal-fired power plant building is alarming – the planet can’t tolerate another US-sized block of plants to be built ….

Other photographs show water vapour emerging from cooling towers where there was none before, such as at the Zhoukou Longda power station in central China, which indicatesa plant burning coal and generating electricity»

* * * * * * * *

La Cina brucia al momento il 55.98% del carbone mondiale per generare energia elettrica. Ma aumentando la produzione di corrente aumentando potenza e numero delle centrali a carbone salirà rapidament al 70%.

«coal plants that would boost China’s existing coal capacity by 25%»

Lo fa per il semplice motivo che il costo dell’energia generata con il carbone costa moto meno di tutte le altre soluzioni possibili.

Poi, per amore di quieto vivere proclama che in un futuro sostituirà il carbone con qualcosa di altro, ma nei fatti si comporta all’opposto. Sanno fare i conti: tutto qua.

China: No Wind Or Solar If It Can’t Beat Coal On Price

L’incontro di Davos si preannuncia essere un altro buco nell’acqua. E tra Gilets Jaunes e recessione sia Mr Macron sia Frau Merkel avranno cose ben più importanti a cui pensare: per esempio, la loro sopravvivenza fisica.


Bloomberg. 2019-01-06. Coal’s Heyday At $100 a Ton Passes in Europe With Curbs on Its Use

Price of the power generation fuel may drop 10% this year in Rotterdam as demand falls in Europe and China.

*

Coal’s three-year run of blistering gains in Europe is set to end, clobbered by a combination of weakening demand and energy polices aimed at phasing out the dirtiest fossil fuel.

After prices more than doubled since 2016 as Asian importers drove demand, coal is expected to fall more than 10 percent to $76.50 a ton next year in Europe, a Bloomberg survey shows. That’s a far cry from October’s five-year high of $100 a ton.

A return to those levels any time soon may be difficult. Slowing growth in China and other Asian countries is damping demand at a time when India’s mines are set to churn out more supplies. In Europe, pressure to cut use of the fuel in power generation is intensifying, while the cost for polluting is near the highest in a decade and expected to climb further.

“Weak demand in Europe and China along with ramping up of global output from recent capacity additions and upgrades will be the main overhang for EU coal prices next year,” said Elchin Mammadov, an analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence.

Since its October high, year-ahead coal contracts on ICE Futures Europe have fallen as low as $83.70 a ton. That reflected an ebb in demand in China after it built up stockpiles needed for winter. In the same period, crude oil, a bellwether for energy prices, collapsed almost 40 percent along with concerns of weakening economic growth and a looming glut.

The global movement against climate change is spurring the push for cleaner alternatives to coal. This has led to several European Union countries setting dates by which they will stop burning the fuel altogether. Britain has committed to phasing out coal completely by 2025. Sweden and France plan to close their last plants by 2023.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government will in February publish a timetable for exiting the world’s most widely used power-plant fuel. The so-called Coal Commission is weighing whether to slow the pace of coal station closures after union leaders and industrial companies objected to rising energy costs.

Coal use faces more headwinds from the EU’s emissions market. Carbon allowances tripled this year and are forecast to jump again in 2019 when market reforms to reduce a glut kick in next year. The rising cost of pollution is likely to boost demand for natural gas, which emits half the carbon of coal.

A Year in the Life of Coal

EU coal for 2019 increased 1.7% through Dec. 21

Demand for coal in Europe has fallen steadily since 2012 and will drop 1.1 percent annually through 2023, International Energy Agency data show. It’s forecast to fall more than 2 percent a year through 2023 in the U.S. and Europe, while China demand will decline.

That contrasts with Southeast Asia and India, where consumption is seen expanding annually by at least 4 percent over the next five years. Newcastle coal, an Asian benchmark, is averaging $106 a ton in 2018, the highest since 2011, and is forecast to average about $95 next year, according to the median of seven estimates compiled by Bloomberg.

Asian Appetite

Coal demand from Southeast Asia and India to continue through 2023

“The story of coal is a tale of two worlds with climate action policies and economic forces leading to closing coal power plants in some countries, while coal continues to play a part in securing access to affordable energy in others,” said Keisuke Sadamori, director of energy markets and security at the Paris-based IEA.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Energie Alternative, Problemia Energetici, Unione Europea

Germania. Alternative. Cessati i sussidi il biogas fallisce. 40,000 a spasso.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-01-11.

2019-01-07__bigas__3-format2020

«’Biogas is as good as dead».


Realizzare i propri sogni ha un suo costo. Cercare di realizzare le proprie allucinazioni comporta soltanto una dilapidazione che si arresta solo davanti al muro del fallimento.

I liberal socialisti tedeschi si sono invaghiti delle energie alternative ed hanno varato grandiosi piani di sussidi ed interventi statali a favore del settore.

Poi, quando anche il denaro degli altri è finito, il settore fallisce: porta i libri in tribunale.

Trump. Fotovoltaico in bancarotta. Ora è il turno di Suniva. Kaputt.

«In April 2017, Suniva filed for bankruptcy» [Fonte]

Sunrun, leader del fotovoltaico. Bilanci truccati prima della quotazione.

Germania. Rinnovabili. SolarWorld fallita. Era l’industria del futuro tedesco.

«On May 10, 2017, SolarWorld AG filed for bankruptcy citing “ongoing price distortions” and “no longer a positive forecast for the future”. In May 2016, a lawsuits brought by U.S. silicon supplier Hemlock was reported as “threatening the continued existence of the company” with damage claims up to $770 million.»

L’elenco dei fallimenti sarebbe tristemente lungo.

Ma adesso al fotovoltaico si sta aggiungendo il biogas: un bagno di sangue per i Contribuenti.

Senza il delirio per le alternative, la Germania potrebbe dimezzare le tasse.

* * * * * * *

«More than 9,000 biogas facilities make Germany the No. 1 player in the renewable energy»

*

«But falling prices and dying subsidies are putting the future of this biofuel into question.»

*

«German government subsidies will end in 2021, which could mark the end for the entire experiment, but the biogas bubble has already deflated»

*

«In 2011, 1,500 new biogas facilities opened on farms across Germany. Last year, it was just 120.»

*

«Once upon a time, biogas was the next big thing, promised a key role in Germany’s transition to renewable energy»

*

«As nuclear plants have been powered down, biogas has indeed stepped in to fill the gap. Biogas accounts for 8 percent of the country’s renewable energy, powering about 8 million German households. In no other country does biogas play such an important role.»

*

«The trouble is that is heavily subsidized by the government»

*

«When Berlin was paying 25 cents per kilowatt hour for biogas, farmers rushed to invest»

*

«Currently, about 20 percent of Germany’s arable land is used for biogas, with 20 percent used to grow food, and 60 percent for animal fodder»

*

«But in the last seven years, almost 20,000 biogas jobs have disappeared, leaving 44,000 employed in the sector.»

*

«But there are ecological downsides to the sector, not least because it encourages monocultures. Although corn is the most productive biogas crop, there are strict limits on how much corn farmers can grow»

*

«To qualify for the government’s tenders, he would have to upgrade his plant. For many small farmers, that investment is more than they can afford.»

*

«he expects half of Germany’s biofuel facilities to disappear after 2021, with considerable loss of flexibility in the energy system»

*

«So it could be the end of the harvest for more small biofuel farmers»

*

«The future of biofuel now lies in the hands of politicians»

* * * * * * * *

Lasciamo al Lettore un semplice calcolo: quanto spende in un anno il Governo federale tedesco, che sussidia ai farmer 25 centesimi per ogni kw/h immesso in rete?

Poniamoci alcune domande.

– Senza aiuti di stato il settore delle alternative a biogas è destinato al fallimento. Come rimpiazzerà la Germania l’8% della produzione di energia elettrica che questo comparto produceva?

– La Germania ha indotto a gestire a pascolo il 20% del terreno arabile. È uno sbilanciamento verso la monocultura assai pericoloso. Basterebbe una epidemia di morbo di Johne, di diarrea virale bovina, di mastite streptococcica, oppure di leucosi bovina enzootica e tutto il settore si azzererebbe.

– A margine, i danni sul mercato del latte potrebbero essere enormi.

* * * * * * * *

Conclusione.

I settori sostenuti da sovvenzioni statali stanno in piedi fino a tanto che vi siano le sovvenzioni.

Cessate queste, si va al fallimento: muoiono le aziende e crepano i sogni sprovvidi.

Rimettere a coltivazioni il 20% dei terreni arabili sarà cosa ben dura. Si dovranno ricollocare gli addetti al biogas e trovare contadini esperti delle coltivazioni allo stato dell’arte. Per non parlare poi degli squilibri indotti nel piano agricolo comunitario.

Handelsblatt. 2018-12-26. As subsidies are phased out, biogas farmers fight to survive

More than 9,000 biogas facilities make Germany the No. 1 player in the renewable energy. But falling prices and dying subsidies are putting the future of this biofuel into question.

*


Seventeen years ago, Thomas Endres was one of the first German farmers to build a biogas plant on his land. Back then, environmentalists thought biogas would be the future of energy.

These days, like many biogas farmers, Endres is thinking about getting out of the business. German government subsidies will end in 2021, which could mark the end for the entire experiment, but the biogas bubble has already deflated. In 2011, 1,500 new biogas facilities opened on farms across Germany. Last year, it was just 120.

Once upon a time, biogas was the next big thing, promised a key role in Germany’s transition to renewable energy. What could be more sustainable than growing your own energy sources?

As nuclear plants have been powered down, biogas has indeed stepped in to fill the gap. Biogas accounts for 8 percent of the country’s renewable energy, powering about 8 million German households. In no other country does biogas play such an important role.

‘Biogas is as good as dead’

The trouble is that is heavily subsidized by the government. When Berlin was paying 25 cents per kilowatt hour for biogas, farmers rushed to invest. The country now has over 9,000 biogas facilities, but the sector has been in crisis since 2014, when subsidies were cut by more than half.

Since last year, the German government no longer automatically subsidizes all players: Instead, biofuel production goes out to tender, with only the best bids winning contracts.

Currently, about 20 percent of Germany’s arable land is used for biogas, with 20 percent used to grow food, and 60 percent for animal fodder. But in the last seven years, almost 20,000 biogas jobs have disappeared, leaving 44,000 employed in the sector.

“Biogas in Germany is as good as dead,” says Jörg Meyer zu Strohe, CEO of PlanET, one of the biggest and oldest biogas plant constructors in Germany. The company now operates almost entirely outside Germany, mostly in France and Belgium.

However, experts still see biofuels as a crucial part of a sustainable energy system. Unlike solar and wind power, it’s dependable and helps even out gaps. The International Energy Agency says biogas could become more important as countries phase out nuclear power.

Environmental downsides

But there are ecological downsides to the sector, not least because it encourages monocultures. Although corn is the most productive biogas crop, there are strict limits on how much corn farmers can grow.

Endres grows a mixed batch of biofuel crops, including 30 percent corn, but also grass, rye and turnips. Manure from cows, chickens and pigs also flows into the process. The heat generated by the stinking fermentation powers seven houses and some public buildings, as well as his own farm facilities.

In spite of his financial difficulties, Endres still believes in biogas. But now he faces a new obstacle: To qualify for the government’s tenders, he would have to upgrade his plant. For many small farmers, that investment is more than they can afford.

So it could be the end of the harvest for more small biofuel farmers. Meyer zu Strohe says he expects half of Germany’s biofuel facilities to disappear after 2021, with considerable loss of flexibility in the energy system.

The future of biofuel now lies in the hands of politicians, who must soon make yet more decisions about the sustainability of the sector. “We just hope they don’t completely let us down,” Endres says.

Pubblicato in: Economia e Produzione Industriale, Energie Alternative

Automobili elettriche. Costi/benefici. Qualche conto. – Bloomberg.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-11-02.

201811-01__Auto_Elettriche__001

Se si riuscisse a poter fare un discorso serio, non inquinato da infiltrazioni politiche oppure ideologiche, si potrebbero fare ragionamenti altrettanto seri sulle automobili elettriche.

Sotto queste condizioni, grande cura dovrebbe essere riposta nel cercare di evitare di emettere sentenze che contengano mezze verità. Spesso è più pericolosa e fuorviante una mezza verità di una menzogna, che almeno è più facilmente riconoscibile. Il risultato di contabilità parziali può essere anche seriamente ingannatore.

Bloomberg pubblica un interessante articolo che compara il fabbisogno energetico di un mezzo che si sposti per mille miglia da New York fino a Daytona Beach: i risultati sono riportati in figura e nell’articolo allegato.

*

Sono dati interessanti, che richiederebbero altri dati ad integrazione.

Non segnaliamo questo per denigrare l’articolo, che invece apprezziamo, ma solo per constatare come la contabilità dei costi non possa fermarsi solo ad alcune voci.

– La produzione di corrente elettrica necessita di impianti produttivi, le centrali elettriche, i costi delle quali sono, nell’ordine, la costruzione, la tenuta in manutenzione, la tenuta in produzione, i costi del combustibile usato e la dispersione negli elettrodotti. A conti fatti una centrale anche a costo di costruzione zero ma che utilizzasse combustibili costosi potrebbe essere meno conveniente di altre soluzioni. Ciò che conta è il costo finale del Kw, omnicomprensivo di tutti gli oneri.

– Un’altra caratteristica di non poca importanza è l’affidabilità dell’impianto. La produzione industriale avviene in determinate fasce orarie, e queste condizionano le richieste di elettricità. La Baviera, per esempio, sfrutta abilmente questi fattori: l’Austria importa nottetempo dai paesi dell’est energia elettrica generata da impianti nucleari e la utilizza per riempire i bacini idrici delle centrali idroelettriche, che di giorno possono quindi generare corrente da esportare ale industrie bavaresi. Si attua una grande economica di scala, razionalizzando la produzione.

– È invalso l’uso di denominare ‘rinnovabili’ le energie alternative. Questo ultimo aggettivo apparirebbe essere ben più proprio. A costo di sembrare brutalmente lapalissiani, non eiste energia solare senza la luce del sole né esiste energia eolica senza vento. Ma la produzione energetica di una nazione non può affidarsi alla presenza di luce e di vento: gli impianti devono produrre anche al buio oppure in condizioni di bonaccia.  In questo l’articolo è molto chiaro:

«Calculating carbon emissions from wind and solar is a bit trickier. Neither emit any carbon dioxide in the course of producing electricity on a daily basis. But unless they’re paired with adequate energy storage — and most existing renewable generation isn’t — carbon-emitting generation has to make up for them whenever the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing.»

– Per quanto riguarda le autovetture, ciò che interessa è il loro costo di acquisto e quello di manutenzione, cui aggiungere ovviamente quello della corrente utilizzata. Ma questo non estingue i costi totali. Al momento attuale le automobili elettriche hanno una autonomia alquanto limitata e necessitano di ore per la ricarica delle batterie. Se questo fattore potrebbe essere di minore interesse per il privato in ferie, una sosta potrebbe anche fare piacere, diventa invece un severo costo aggiuntivo per chiunque usi la autovettura a scopi commerciali.

*

L’elencazioni delle fonti dei costi è chiaramente incompleta, ma dovrebbe essere sufficiente a dare un’idea sia pur approssimata della complessità dell’argomento.

Una sola considerazione finale.

Al momento il mercato delle autovetture elettriche sembrerebbe essere limitato alla nicchia della circolazione cittadina da parte di quanti possano, e vogliano, acquistare una macchina elettrica come seconda autovettura. Un onere che non tutti possono permettersi.

Sarebbe suggeribile che chiunque stesse valutandone l’acquisto facesse una accurata ricognizione della totalità degli oneri, per evitarsi facili entusiasmi generatori di conti da pagare.


Bloomberg. 2018-11-01. You’ll Need 286 Pounds of Coal to Fuel That Electric Road Trip

– Bloomberg NEF analyses mileage, efficiency of different fuels

– Compares gas, wind, solar, coal and natgas for 1,000-mile trip

*

New Yorkers looking to escape the winter chill by driving to Daytona Beach, Florida, would use about 40 gallons of gasoline to traverse the 1,000 miles in a Chevrolet Impala.

Switch that gas guzzler out for an electron-eating EV and the equation changes. A Tesla Model S traveling the same distance would need power generated by about 2,500 cubic feet of natural gas, 286 pounds of coal or 33 minutes of blades spinning on a giant offshore wind turbine to make the same journey.

As electric vehicles slowly become a bigger part of the global automobile fleet, questions about mileage and fuel efficiency are going to become more apposite. While there are multiple variables that can affect electric vehicle energy consumption, a Bloomberg NEF analysis illustrated some ballpark estimates to give drivers a better picture of what’s happening underneath the hood.

Coal

Taking that same 1,000-mile road trip in an electric vehicle that needs 33 kilowatt-hours of energy to travel 100 miles, like a Tesla Model S, would require about 286 pounds (130 kilograms) of coal to be burned at the local power plant. Modern coal plants only convert about 35 percent of the fuel’s energy into electricity, and about 10 percent of that electricity could be lost as it travels along power lines.

Even with all those losses, the electric vehicle road trip is still better for the climate than driving a gasoline-powered car. Burning that much coal would release about 310 kilograms of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, compared with 350 kilograms by the 40 gallons of gasoline. Even though coal tends to emit more pollutants than oil for the amount of energy it generates, the efficiency of the electric vehicle, which recharges its battery with every brake, more than makes up the difference.

Natural Gas

A natural gas power plant producing the same amount of electricity would need to burn about 2,500 cubic feet of the fuel, enough to fill a small apartment in Hong Kong or a master bedroom in Dallas. Gas plants are more efficient than coal, typically converting about half the fuel’s energy into electricity. It’s also much cleaner, emitting just 170 kilograms of carbon dioxide for the 1,000-mile journey.

Solar

When it comes to charging electric vehicles with solar power, size matters. A typical 10-kilowatt rooftop array would need about seven days to create enough electricity for a 1,000-mile journey, as clouds and darkness mean it only operates at about 20 percent of its capacity on an average day.

Scale up to a photovoltaic power station, though, and it would take a matter of minutes, not days. At a modest-sized solar field like the 25-megawatt DeSoto Next Generation Solar Center in Florida, the average daily output would produce enough electricity for a 1,000-mile drive in less than four minutes.

Wind

Wind is a similar story, with different sizes of turbines producing different amounts of electricity. Take the Vestas V90-2.0 MW, an 80-meter tall behemoth that can be found swirling on the plains of West Texas, among other locations. Just one of these turbines, and wind farms are usually planted with dozens of them, produces enough electricity in a day to power a 1,000-mile trip every 33 minutes.

Calculating carbon emissions from wind and solar is a bit trickier. Neither emit any carbon dioxide in the course of producing electricity on a daily basis. But unless they’re paired with adequate energy storage — and most existing renewable generation isn’t — carbon-emitting generation has to make up for them whenever the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Energie Alternative, Problemia Energetici, Stati Uniti

Kontrordine Kompagni!!!! Il Mit afferma che il nucleare è l’unica via per il futuro.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-09-05.

Contrordine Compagni 001

«nuclear play vital role in climate solutions»



«L’Istituto di tecnologia del Massachusetts (in inglese: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT) è una delle più importanti università di ricerca del mondo con sede a Cambridge, nel Massachusetts. ….

Il MIT si è classificato in 1ª posizione assoluta nella annuale classifica delle migliori università del mondo 2012/2013 e del 2015/2016 di QS World University Rankings. Risulta primo nelle facoltà di chimica, ingegneria elettrica ed elettronica, ingegneria meccanica, fisica, informatica, ingegneria dei materiali e ingegneria chimica ….

Il MIT vanta 78 Premi Nobel, 29 nella fisica, 20 nell’economia, 15 nella chimica, 10 nella medicina e 4 per la pace.» [Fonte]

Nel 2017 la fondazione che governa il Mit aveva un capitale di 14.968 miliardi Usd. Dieci anni fa, nel 2008, erano 10.069 miliardi Usd.

Come ha fatto a tesaurizzare un simile capitale in dieci anni? Semplice: incamerando fondi federali per il ‘clima’, le energie rinnovabile, e così via. Poi, indubbiamente sanno gestire bene il proprio capitale.

Ma questi fiumi impetuosi di denaro stanno esaurendosi, e l’urlo di dolore che si leva dai liberal affamati supera la ionosfera. Tranquilli: non è problema di credo ideologico, ma di mettere il mestolo nel minestrone. Quindi via il ‘clima’, resta il surriscaldamento, ben venga il nucleare. E quindi, giù nuovi fondi.

I liberal democratici adorano mammona.

* * * * * * *

Attenzione. Da leggersi con cura sovra le righe.

«new policy models and cost-cutting technologies could help nuclear play vital role in climate solutions.»

*

«The authors of a new MIT study say that unless nuclear energy is meaningfully incorporated into the global mix of low-carbon energy technologies, the challenge of climate change will be much more difficult and costly to solve»

*

«Our analysis demonstrates that realizing nuclear energy’s potential is essential to achieving a deeply decarbonized energy future in many regions of the world »

*

«Incorporating new policy and business models, as well as innovations in construction that may make deployment of cost-effective nuclear power plants more affordable, could enable nuclear energy to help meet the growing global demand for energy generation while decreasing emissions to address climate change»

*

«Global electricity consumption is on track to grow 45 percent by 2040, and the team’s analysis shows that the exclusion of nuclear from low-carbon scenarios could cause the average cost of electricity to escalate dramatically»

*

«policymakers should avoid premature closures of existing plants, which undermine efforts to reduce emissions and increase the cost of achieving emission reduction targets.»

* * * * * * * *

I tempi sono mutati radicalmente.

Chi avesse sostenuto codeste tesi due anni or sono sarebbe stato crocefisso nel corridoio dei passi perduti.



MIT News. 2018-09-04. MIT Energy Initiative study reports on the future of nuclear energy

Findings suggest new policy models and cost-cutting technologies could help nuclear play vital role in climate solutions.

*

How can the world achieve the deep carbon emissions reductions that are necessary to slow or reverse the impacts of climate change? The authors of a new MIT study say that unless nuclear energy is meaningfully incorporated into the global mix of low-carbon energy technologies, the challenge of climate change will be much more difficult and costly to solve. For nuclear energy to take its place as a major low-carbon energy source, however, issues of cost and policy need to be addressed.

In “The Future of Nuclear Energy in a Carbon-Constrained World,” released by the MIT Energy Initiative (MITEI) on Sept. 3, the authors analyze the reasons for the current global stall of nuclear energy capacity — which currently accounts for only 5 percent of global primary energy production — and discuss measures that could be taken to arrest and reverse that trend.

The study group, led by MIT researchers in collaboration with colleagues from Idaho National Laboratory and the University of Wisconsin at Madison, is presenting its findings and recommendations at events in London, Paris, and Brussels this week, followed by events on Sept. 25 in Washington, and on Oct. 9 in Tokyo. MIT graduate and undergraduate students and postdocs, as well as faculty from Harvard University and members of various think tanks, also contributed to the study as members of the research team.

“Our analysis demonstrates that realizing nuclear energy’s potential is essential to achieving a deeply decarbonized energy future in many regions of the world,” says study co-chair Jacopo Buongiorno, the TEPCO Professor and associate department head of the Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering at MIT. He adds, “Incorporating new policy and business models, as well as innovations in construction that may make deployment of cost-effective nuclear power plants more affordable, could enable nuclear energy to help meet the growing global demand for energy generation while decreasing emissions to address climate change.”

The study team notes that the electricity sector in particular is a prime candidate for deep decarbonization. Global electricity consumption is on track to grow 45 percent by 2040, and the team’s analysis shows that the exclusion of nuclear from low-carbon scenarios could cause the average cost of electricity to escalate dramatically.

“Understanding the opportunities and challenges facing the nuclear energy industry requires a comprehensive analysis of technical, commercial, and policy dimensions,” says Robert Armstrong, director of MITEI and the Chevron Professor of Chemical Engineering. “Over the past two years, this team has examined each issue, and the resulting report contains guidance policymakers and industry leaders may find valuable as they evaluate options for the future.”

The report discusses recommendations for nuclear plant construction, current and future reactor technologies, business models and policies, and reactor safety regulation and licensing. The researchers find that changes in reactor construction are needed to usher in an era of safer, more cost-effective reactors, including proven construction management practices that can keep nuclear projects on time and on budget.

“A shift towards serial manufacturing of standardized plants, including more aggressive use of fabrication in factories and shipyards, can be a viable cost-reduction strategy in countries where the productivity of the traditional construction sector is low,” says MIT visiting research scientist David Petti, study executive director and Laboratory Fellow at the Idaho National Laboratory. “Future projects should also incorporate reactor designs with inherent and passive safety features.”

These safety features could include core materials with high chemical and physical stability and engineered safety systems that require limited or no emergency AC power and minimal external intervention. Features like these can reduce the probability of severe accidents occurring and mitigate offsite consequences in the event of an incident. Such designs can also ease the licensing of new plants and accelerate their global deployment.

“The role of government will be critical if we are to take advantage of the economic opportunity and low-carbon potential that nuclear has to offer,” says John Parsons, study co-chair and senior lecturer at MIT’s Sloan School of Management. “If this future is to be realized, government officials must create new decarbonization policies that put all low-carbon energy technologies (i.e. renewables, nuclear, fossil fuels with carbon capture) on an equal footing, while also exploring options that spur private investment in nuclear advancement.”

The study lays out detailed options for government support of nuclear. For example, the authors recommend that policymakers should avoid premature closures of existing plants, which undermine efforts to reduce emissions and increase the cost of achieving emission reduction targets. One way to avoid these closures is the implementation of zero-emissions credits — payments made to electricity producers where electricity is generated without greenhouse gas emissions — which the researchers note are currently in place in New York, Illinois, and New Jersey.

Another suggestion from the study is that the government support development and demonstration of new nuclear technologies through the use of four “levers”: funding to share regulatory licensing costs; funding to share research and development costs; funding for the achievement of specific technical milestones; and funding for production credits to reward successful demonstration of new designs.

The study includes an examination of the current nuclear regulatory climate, both in the United States and internationally. While the authors note that significant social, political, and cultural differences may exist among many of the countries in the nuclear energy community, they say that the fundamental basis for assessing the safety of nuclear reactor programs is fairly uniform, and should be reflected in a series of basic aligned regulatory principles. They recommend regulatory requirements for advanced reactors be coordinated and aligned internationally to enable international deployment of commercial reactor designs, and to standardize and ensure a high level of safety worldwide.

The study concludes with an emphasis on the urgent need for both cost-cutting advancements and forward-thinking policymaking to make the future of nuclear energy a reality.

“The Future of Nuclear Energy in a Carbon-Constrained World” is the eighth in the “Future of…” series of studies that are intended to serve as guides to researchers, policymakers, and industry. Each report explores the role of technologies that might contribute at scale in meeting rapidly growing global energy demand in a carbon-constrained world. Nuclear power was the subject of the first of these interdisciplinary studies, with the 2003 “Future of Nuclear Powerreport (an update was published in 2009). The series has also included a study on the future of the nuclear fuel cycle. Other reports in the series have focused on carbon dioxide sequestration, natural gas, the electric grid, and solar power. These comprehensive reports are written by multidisciplinary teams of researchers. The research is informed by a distinguished external advisory committee.

Pubblicato in: Energie Alternative, Unione Europea

Germania. Energie alternative. Produttività al 2.24%. – Handelsblatt.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-08-19.

2018-08-17__renewable

Negli ambienti che contano, ossia quelli che investono mettendo lì il denaro cash, iniziano a serpeggiare serissimi dubbi su molti aspetti della situazione tedesca: tutta una serie di perplessità, che sommate assieme conducono alla sospensione degli investimenti nel comparto produttivo. Un aspetto è di semplicità al limite del banale:

Germania. La demografia che stritola. Mancano tre milioni di lavoratori. – Vbw.

Germania. Incidenza economica del calo demografico. – Bloomberg.

Germania. Realtà geografica, non più umana, politica ed economica.

*

Il quesito è semplice: a cosa mai potrà servire una produzione sostenuta di energia quando le proiezioni della popolazione tedesca autoctona la danno dimezzata in qualche decennio?

Una cosa sono le dotte, si fa per dire, disquisizioni accademiche, sostituite di questi tempi dagli articoli sui media e dalle continue interviste su youtube, senza tener conto delle interviste rilasciate da illustri sconosciuti/e che parlano con grande sicurezza, ed una totalmente differente e il mettere sul tavolino una decina di miliardi di euro, estratti dalle proprie tasche.

Ci si metta nei panni di chi investe cifre di tal rango, con attesa di rientrare nell’arco di una decina di anni: orbene, costui è interessato massimamente a come si prospetta la situazione in tale arco di tempo. Ha l’attuale in non cale.

* * * * * * *

«The comment comes after a high-pressure front over the region, known to cause clear and sunny skies, brought wind turbines to a standstill»

*

«At one point in July, the 38,000 wind turbines with a 58,000-megawatt capacity delivered only 1,300 megawatts to the grid»

*

«Last month, the 4.4 billion kilowatt hours of wind energy produced was 20 percent less than in July 2017.»

*

«To get a lot of wind energy, you need a lot of wind»

*

«high temperatures are not optimal for solar energy. Moderate temperatures lead to greater performance. The warmer a module gets, the less electricity it produces»

* * * * * * * *

Due elementi sarebbero da essere enfatizzati.

«the 38,000 wind turbines with a 58,000-megawatt capacity delivered only 1,300 megawatts to the grid»

Ma (100 * 1.3 / 58) = 2.24%.

Al sodo, gli impianti delle energie alternative hanno immesso in rete il 2.24% della loro potenzialità.

Se per alcuni questo sia un successo mirabolante e se per altri sia invece un fiasco terrificante, per i poveracci che ci hanno investito è una débâcle. Ma è universalmente noto come i politici guardino con malcelato sprezzo quei vili ragionieri contabili, salvo poi criminalizzarli a default ottenuto.

«To get a lot of wind energy, you need a lot of wind»

Già: chi lo avrebbe mai detto? Chi mai avrebbe potuto immaginarselo?

Senza vento le turbine eoliche non producono alcunché.

Il comparto produttivo potrà quindi lavorare solo se la Divina Provvidenza mandasse un po’ di vento.

Ma ben difficilmente chi investe miliardi lo fa nella sola speranza che intervenga la Divina Provvidenza.

Nota.

A ottobre si voterà in Assia ed in Baviera. Che il vento non cambi direzione?



Handelsblatt. 2018-08-16. Germany’s renewable energy production defies fickle weather

The recent unpredictable weather is a reminder of renewable energy’s variability, prompting coal proponents to argue Germany shouldn’t abandon conventional fuels. But heat waves don’t play favorites.

*

Northern Europe’s summer heat wave showed once again how sensitive wind and solar energy can be to the vagaries of weather. And proponents of the continued use of coal wasted no time calling for a slowdown in abandoning conventional fuels for power generation.

“This unusual summer shows how important a broad energy mix is, in which every type of generation can play to its strengths,” said Rolf Martin Schmitz, chief executive of RWE, Germany’s largest electrical utility. RWE relies exclusively on conventional fuels like coal, gas and nuclear.

It was a bold gambit to seize on weather conditions that are caused by too much carbon in the atmosphere to justify putting even more carbon emissions into the air.

Stilled wind turbines.

The comment comes after a high-pressure front over the region, known to cause clear and sunny skies, brought wind turbines to a standstill. At one point in July, the 38,000 wind turbines with a 58,000-megawatt capacity delivered only 1,300 megawatts to the grid. Last month, the 4.4 billion kilowatt hours of wind energy produced was 20 percent less than in July 2017.

“To get a lot of wind energy, you need a lot of wind,” said think tank Agora Energiewende’s Christoph Podewils. “And that usually comes with a weather change.”

By contrast, the uninterrupted sunny weather, with temperatures hitting 39 degrees Celsius (102 degrees Fahrenheit), enabled Germany’s solar installations to produce 6 billion kilowatt hours of electricity in July – more than any other month.

Counterintuitively, high temperatures are not optimal for solar energy. Moderate temperatures lead to greater performance. “The warmer a module gets, the less electricity it produces,” said Robert Girmes from Energy Weather.

The best month for solar energy was May, when sunny weather with temperatures at a more pleasant 23 degrees Celsius led to the generation of 32,000 megawatts, while that hot 39-degree day in July yielded only 27,000. A gruelingly hot summer like this one can actually reduce performance by 5 percent.

It isn’t just renewables.

For that matter, the hot weather also affected the performance of conventional power plants, reducing their output. Nuclear and hard coal-fired plants often have to cut back on production because the water they need for cooling is too warm or the rivers are too low to draw from.

In any case, the continual increase in the share of renewable energy in electricity production defies the variable weather, whether heat wave or cloudy doldrums or even reduced subsidies. Wind energy may have been down this summer, but the long periods of sunshine more than made up for it, so that overall electricity production from renewable sources rose 2 percent in July.

For the first half of 2018, the share of power provided by renewable sources was 36 percent. And for the first time, electricity from wind, sun, water and biomass exceeded that from coal-fired plants.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Economia e Produzione Industriale, Energie Alternative

Energie Alternative. Solarworld alla seconda brutta bancarotta.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-04-10.

2018-04-09__Solarworld__001

Solarworld Seeks State Aid to Rise Again

«Bouncing back from bankruptcy, Qatar-backed panel maker Solarworld is hitting up the government for support.

Frank Asbeck, the man who has dominated the German solar industry for two decades, refuses to go down without a fight. Having led his once all-conquering Solarworld company into bankruptcy in May, and seen it partly saved by a Qatari rescue package earlier this month, he is now looking for state help to revive his solar empire, Handelsblatt has learned.

Handelsblatt’s sources say Mr. Asbeck has been sounding out political options to get state support for his company. The states of Thuringia and Saxony, where the company’s two factories are based, are willing to offer financial guarantees to the reconstituted Solarworld. No formal application has been made for state assistance in any state, not least because Mr. Asbeck would have to submit a substantial business plan.

For a number of reasons, both national and state politicians will be deeply ambivalent about helping out the irrepressible Mr. Asbeck. First, EU law puts severe restrictions on government money for businesses. Second, he has benefited handsomely from public subsidies in the past. Finally, the fact that a Qatari investor now owns 49 percent of Solarworld is a difficulty»


Qatar Rides to the Rescue of Solarworld

«The administrator reports a deal is near to save two factories, but only a quarter of the firm’s employees will keep their jobs.

Qatari investors are negotiating to buy two factories belonging to Solarworld, Europe’s largest maker of solar panels, which filed for insolvency a week ago.

According to industry sources, the insolvency’s administrator, Horst Piepenburg, is in talks with the Qatar Foundation, which owns a 29 percent share of Solarworld through Qatar Solar, to acquire the firm’s solar panel factories in Freudenberg in Saxony and Arnstadt in Thuringia. The plan involves acquiring Solarworld’s land, equipment and existing inventory at the two sites.

Mr. Piepenburg said only that he was in intense negotiations with an undisclosed “investor group,” but he declined to identify them. He added that the talks had advanced far enough that the chances of success were greater than failure. The Qataris and Solarworld founder Frank Asbeck declined to comment.»

* * * * * * *

«SolarWorld ha ricevuto il premio di sostenibilità tedesca nella categoria della “Produzione più sostenibile del 2008”.» [Fonte]

*

«The company filed for insolvency of its German subsidiaries alone in May 2017. While subsidiary SolarWorld America was not itself insolvent, it subsequently was put up for sale or other action to help resolve the debts of the German parent company. In the beginning of August 2017, leaving all liabilities behind, all the assets alone were acquired by the original Founder of SolarWorld Ag, Frank Asbeck along with Qatar Solar Technologies (QSTec) to form SolarWorld Industries GmbH, thus becoming completely debt-free and the only Solar Manufacturer in the world with zero-debt and zero liability»

*

«On Aug. 18, 2017, however, news came that the German administrator of SolarWorld AG’s bankruptcy had put SolarWorld Americas up for sale, though no potential buyers had been identified at that time. The US-based subsidiary, which reportedly produced half of “SolarWorld” branded modules worldwide, was put “in something of a limbo” by the bankruptcy and a spokesperson stated the company had entered an “open ended” mergers and acquisitions process» [Fonte]

*

«Germany’s last significant maker of solar panels filed for insolvency for the second time in a year as China gluts the market with dumping prices»

*

«Solarworld …. is declaring bankruptcy for the second time in a year, and this time it may be curtains»

*

«The business, launched with such optimism in 1988 as a combination of German manufacturing skill and future-oriented technology, has suffered from a shift in the market, as solar panels, like many other innovations before them, became a commodity»

* * *

Solarworld è stata una delle tante voragini di fondi pubblici immolati sull’altare degli interessi personali dei liberal.

«launched with such optimism in 1988 as a combination of German manufacturing skill and future-oriented technology»

Già. Tutto quell’ottimismo nella tecnologia del futuro è finita in una duplice bancarotta fraudolenta.

Oltre cento miliardi di fondi pubblici erogati una tantum su base ideologica andati in fumo. E perché mai? La risposta è scritta dalla stessa SolarWorld, qui sotto.

2018-04-09__Solarworld__002


Handelsblatt. 2018-04-01. Solarworld back in bankruptcy court

Germany’s last significant maker of solar panels filed for insolvency for the second time in a year as China gluts the market with dumping prices.

*

Solarworld, the erstwhile showcase for the rebirth of East German industry and the country’s last remaining producer of solar panels, is declaring bankruptcy for the second time in a year, and this time it may be curtains.

The business, launched with such optimism in 1988 as a combination of German manufacturing skill and future-oriented technology, has suffered from a shift in the market, as solar panels, like many other innovations before them, became a commodity. At the same time, like other manufacturers in Europe and the US, the company has fallen victim to China’s predatory glutting of the global market with heavily subsidized production and price dumping.

Ironically, it was US President Donald Trump’s January retaliation to this price dumping with a 30-percent tariff on imported solar panels that drove the final nail into Solarworld’s coffin.

The company, or at least its technology, may yet survive in some form, but its demise highlights once again the conundrum posed by China’s effort to dominate technologies that many countries see as essential to their future security. “Without our own production, we would be dependent on China in a few years,” said Andreas Bett, director of Fraunhofer-Institute for solar energy systems.

——-

“Without our own production, we would be dependent on China in a few years.”

Andreas Bett, Fraunhofer Institute

——-

The new bankruptcy filing affects the 600 remaining workers in the Saxon town of Freiberg – down from 1,850 before last year’s insolvency – and a few dozen in the Bonn headquarters. A bankruptcy trustee must now determine whether the prospects for continuing as a restructured business justify aid to keep production running for now. Most experts feel Solarworld is operating in the red and see no turnaround in the near future.

Solarworld and other European manufacturers have banded together to lobby against Chinese dumping through EU ProSun. Currently, the European Union imposes a minimum price for solar panels but more than half the imports circumvent that restriction. “The anti-dumping instrument of the EU has as many holes as Swiss cheese,” a spokesman for EU ProSun said. “There are no checks and there is no political will.”

Solarworld never really got off the ground after August’s restructuring, despite a cash injection from Qatar and financial contributions from firm founder Frank Asbeck. It had a credibility problem after the bankruptcy. Well-connected employees went to the competition. Suppliers demanded prepayment.

Solarworld’s cells are high quality and private homeowners are happy to pay a premium to have them. But commercial solar park operators are much more sensitive to price. While any future as a self-standing company seems out of the question, Solarworld could be bought up by a competitor, perhaps even a Chinese company. Or at least the know-how and modern production facilities in Saxony and Thuringia.

Separately, SMA Solar Technology, a supplier of equipment to the industry, reported a sales decline for 2017, in part because of the US tariffs but also because of price pressures. Sales were €891 million, compared with €947 million in 2016. Earnings before interest, taxes and depreciation were down nearly a third to €97 million, while net profit was steady €30 million due to tax breaks on carried-forward losses in China.

Pubblicato in: Economia e Produzione Industriale, Energie Alternative, Unione Europea

Russia. Il Lebedev Physics Institute ipotizza una nuova Piccola Era Glaciale.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-11-26.

2017-11-21__Little Ice Era__001

Sul ‘clima’ è stato detto tutto ed il suo contrario.

L’unica cosa certa è che i liberal ed i socialisti ideologici ci hanno guadagnato sopra bastimenti carichi di miliardi. Tutto gli stati occidentali vi hanno profuso fiumi di denaro finiti alla fine nelle tasche di quella genia.

Inutile, perfettamente inutile è ogni tentativo di confutazione logica. Denaro e logica non sono propriamente amici: è impossibile convincere un corrotto.

Adesso il Lebedev Physics Institute ipotizza l’avvento una nuova Piccola Era Glaciale.

«All sunspots have disappeared from the side of the Sun facing Earth, reported scientists at Moscow’s Lebedev Physics Institute, basing their conclusions on photos taken two weeks ago»

*

«The consequences could be far-reaching for the entire planet»

*

«The Little Ice Age brought colder winters to Europe and North America»

*

Noi siamo tutto tranne che la caricatura del frate predicatore medievale: non intendiamo quindi convincere nessuno.

Ciò che ci basta è che cessino quelle immani sovvenzioni statali ai poveri liberal e socialisti che avrebbero voluto tramutarsi da milionari a miliardari alle spese della Collettività.

Nota.

Si è perfettamente a corrente di una teoria propalata come verità assoluta, secondo la quale ad estati calde seguirebbero inverni freddi. I suoi supporter sostengono che quindi, a dir loro, gli inverni freddi sarebbero la evidente dimostrazione che il ‘clima’ vira verso il torrido. Costoro sembrerebbero ignorare che le temperature medie altro non sono che la somma algebrica dei dati nell’arco di un dato periodo temporale.


Russia Beyond. 2017-11-15. Solar minimum is coming: Earth faces a deep freeze future, say Russian scientists

All sunspots have disappeared from the side of the Sun facing Earth, reported scientists at Moscow’s Lebedev Physics Institute, basing their conclusions on photos taken two weeks ago. The consequences could be far-reaching for the entire planet.

Something is wrong with the Sun. In September, NASA announced the biggest solar flare in 12 years, which was unexpected considering that the Sun is heading into a period known as the solar minimum, when surface activity becomes muted.

In 2016, using observations of other sunlike stars made by NASA’s Kepler Space Telescope, scientists in the U.S. announced the Sun is entering a special phase of its magnetic evolution. These results offered the first real confirmation that the 11-year sunspot cycles are likely to disappear entirely. This means the Sun will have fewer sunspots than during the first half of its estimated 10 billion year life as a hydrogen-burning star.

Scientists originally thought this would happen slowly, but according to researchers at the Lebedev Physics Institute, it has already happened – complex sunspots and associated solar flares have completely disappeared on the Sun.

“Based on the picture that we are seeing now, the Sun is moving inevitably towards another low, that will be reached in late 2018 – the first half of 2019,” scientists said in a statement.

That’s just the first stage of the process, however. According to researchers in Moscow, the regions of hot plasma will also disappear, and then solar radiation will also drop to a zero.

“Finally, at the minimum point, the solar magnetic energy almost completely vanishes,” the researchers said. “In this form, our star can exist from several months to a year, after which new fluxes of the magnetic field begin to float from the depth of the Sun, the first spots appear, and the flywheel of the solar cycle starts a new 11-year revolution.”

Currently, individual spots and even faint flashes may still appear on the Sun for a short time, but this is only the last fading burst of activity. According to researchers, the sunspots will completely disappear within the next 2-3 months.

The consequences for Earth might be more cold, ice, and heavy snowfalls. The last so-called Little Ice Age, observed in the 17th-18th centuries, coincided with the known “failure of the solar cycle, during which for 50 years there were almost no sunspots on the Sun.”

The Little Ice Age brought colder winters to Europe and North America. In the mid-17th century, farms and villages in the Swiss Alps were destroyed by encroaching glaciers. Canals and rivers in Great Britain and the Netherlands frequently froze, and early settlers in North America reported exceptionally severe winters.


Lebedev Physics Institute. 2017-11-15. На Солнце исчезли пятна

Число пятен на Солнце, считающееся главной характеристикой уровня солнечной активности, стремительно падает до нуля. В настоящее время на обращенной к Земле стороне Солнца не наблюдается ни одного пятна. Есть ли сейчас пятна на обратной стороне Солнца, сказать трудно, но исходя из фотографий Солнца 2 недели назад, когда эта сторона была обращена к Земле, пятна отсутствуют и там. Тем самым наша звезда сейчас очень близка по внешнему виду к идеальному объекту, без каких-либо “недостатков”, каким его и представляли люди до начала 17 века. То, что на совершенном небесном теле, к каким относили тогда Солнце, существуют пятна, так потрясло современников, что первые сообщения об этом публиковались анонимно, либо в частных переписках, из опасений обвинений в ереси. И даже после того, как наличие пятен было доказано, “идеальность” Солнца пытались спасти, утверждая, что пятна являются облаками, отрицая доказанный сейчас факт принадлежности пятен к поверхности Солнца.

Число пятен на Солнце является главным параметром, по которому измеряется 11-летний солнечный цикл, история которого насчитывает уже почти 270 лет. Раз в 11 лет число пятен достигает максимума, а примерно посередине между этими пиками снижается до наименьшего значения, называемого солнечным минимумом. Природа этих изменений оставалась непонятной на протяжении почти 200 лет и лишь в середине XX века было установлено, что с шагом 11 лет меняется магнитное поле Солнце (поочерёдно усиливается и ослабляется). Так как пятна образуются в областях сильного поля, то в моменты максимальной напряженности поля достигает максимума и число пятен. Магнитная и связанная с ней электрическая энергия Солнца являются основным “топливом” для солнечной активности (солнечные вспышки и выбросы вещества имеют в своей основе электрическую и магнитную природу). По этой причине в годы максимума солнечного цикла растет и “взрывная” активность Солнца. В годы минимума она напротив затухает.

Исходя из картины, которую мы наблюдаем сейчас, Солнце неотвратимо движется к очередному минимуму, который будет достигнут в конце 2018 – первой половине 2019 годов. На этом пути на Солнце сначала должны полностью исчезнуть сложные группы пятен и связанные с ними солнечные вспышки, что похоже уже произошло. Затем в короне Солнца исчезают области горячей плазмы, а производимое ими рентгеновское излучение Солнца падает до почти нулевого фонового уровня. Оставшиеся солнечные пятна предельно упрощаются и, хотя визуально присутствуют на диске, не могут уже ни греть плазму, ни производить вспышки. На следующем этапе пятна на Солнце полностью исчезают, хотя области повышенного магнитного поля еще видны на диске. Наконец в точке минимума магнитная энергия Солнца практически полностью обращается в ноль, и оно вырождается в почти в идеально симметричный объект без каких-либо особенностей. В таком виде наша звезда может существовать от нескольких месяцев до года, после чего из глубины Солнца постепенно начинают всплывать новые потоки магнитного поля, появляются первые пятна, и маховик солнечного цикла начинает новый 11-летний оборот.

В настоящий момент Солнце, судя по всему, начало входить в третий этап, характеризующийся постепенным исчезновением пятен. На этом этапе всё еще на короткое время могут появляться отдельные пятна и даже происходить слабые вспышки, но это является лишь последними угасающими всплесками активности. Окончательное исчезновение пятен с Солнца может произойти уже в течение 2-3 ближайших месяцев.

Хотя низкая солнечная активность кажется благоприятной ситуацией для Земли, ученые в своих “апокалиптических прогнозах”, как ни парадоксально, крайне редко связывают их с высокой активностью Солнца и напротив, с опасением относятся к низкой. Вызвано это тем, что Солнце в доступной человечеству истории никогда не производило суперсвспышек, способных повлиять на жизнь. Периоды же “замораживания” солнечного цикла в истории наблюдались и показывали корреляцию с климатом. В частности, последний так называемый малый ледниковый период в истории Земли, наблюдавшийся на стыке 17 и 18 веков совпал по времени с известным сбоем солнечного цикла (минимумом Маундера), в течение которого на Солнце на протяжении почти 50 лет почти не было пятен — то есть активность замерла на несколько десятилетий в точке минимума.

Опасения о том, выйдет ли Солнце из очередного минимума, и не произойдет ли сбой, в ходе которого оно останется в нем, высказываются при приближении каждого солнечного минимума. За последние 200 лет, однако, повторений ситуации с минимумом Маундера не было. Из того, что видно на Солнце сейчас, его эволюция происходит пока в полном соответствии с поведением, которое наблюдалось в ходе предыдущих 11-летних циклов. Что будет потом, покажут дальнейшие исследования.

>>> Traduttore automatico <<<

Il numero di punti sul Sole, considerato la caratteristica principale del livello di attività solare, sta rapidamente scendendo a zero. Al momento attuale, nessuna macchia solare è osservata sul lato del Sole rivolto verso la Terra. Ora ci sono punti sul retro del Sole, è difficile da dire, ma sulla base delle foto del Sole 2 settimane fa, quando questo lato era rivolto verso la Terra, non ci sono nemmeno punti. Così, la nostra stella è ora molto vicina nell’aspetto all’oggetto ideale, senza “difetti”, come è stata rappresentata dalla gente prima dell’inizio del 17 ° secolo. Il fatto che il perfetto corpo celeste a cui ha attribuito quando il Sole, ci sono macchie, contemporanei così scioccato che i primi rapporti su di esso sono stati pubblicati in forma anonima o in corrispondenza privata, per paura di accuse di eresia. E anche dopo che le macchie sono state provate, l'”idealità” del Sole è stata tentata di salvare, sostenendo che le macchie sono nuvole, negando il fatto ormai dimostrato che le macchie appartengono alla superficie del Sole.

Il numero di punti sul Sole è il parametro principale, secondo il quale viene misurato il ciclo solare di 11 anni, la cui storia è già stata contata per quasi 270 anni. Una volta in 11 anni il numero di spot raggiunge il massimo e approssimativamente nel mezzo tra questi picchi si riduce al valore più basso, chiamato il minimo solare. La natura di questi cambiamenti è rimasta incomprensibile per quasi 200 anni e solo verso la metà del XX secolo è stato stabilito che il campo magnetico del Sole cambia con un passo di 11 anni (alternativamente amplificato e indebolito). Poiché i punti sono formati in regioni di un campo forte, il numero di punti raggiunge un massimo nei momenti di massima intensità del campo. L’energia elettrica magnetica e associata del Sole è il principale “combustibile” per l’attività solare (i brillamenti solari e le emissioni di materia sono fondamentalmente di natura elettrica e magnetica). Per questo motivo, negli anni del massimo del ciclo solare cresce anche l’attività “esplosiva” del Sole. Negli anni di minimo, è smorzato al contrario.

Sulla base del quadro che stiamo vedendo ora, il Sole si muove inevitabilmente verso un altro minimo, che sarà raggiunto alla fine del 2018 – la prima metà del 2019. Su questa strada, le complesse macchie solari e le brillamenti solari associati dovrebbero prima completamente scomparire sul Sole, il che sembra essere già accaduto. Quindi nella corona del Sole scompaiono le regioni del plasma caldo e la radiazione a raggi X del Sole prodotta da esse scende a un livello di fondo quasi zero. Le restanti macchie solari sono estremamente semplificate e, sebbene visivamente presenti sul disco, non possono più riscaldare il plasma o produrre bagliori. Nella fase successiva, le macchie sul Sole scompaiono completamente, sebbene le regioni del campo magnetico aumentato siano ancora visibili sul disco. Infine, nel punto minimo, l’energia magnetica solare svanisce quasi completamente e degenera in un oggetto quasi perfettamente simmetrico senza alcuna singolarità. In quanto tale, la nostra stella può esistere da pochi mesi a un anno, e poi dalle profondità del Sole a poco a poco cominciano ad emergere, nuovi flussi del campo magnetico, ci sono il primo posto, e ciclo solare il volano inizia una nuova rotazione di 11 anni.

Al momento, il sole, apparentemente, ha iniziato ad entrare nel terzo stadio, caratterizzato da una graduale scomparsa delle macchie. In questa fase, i singoli punti e persino i deboli bagliori possono ancora apparire per un breve periodo, ma questa è solo l’ultima esplosione di attività. La scomparsa definitiva delle macchie solari dal Sole potrebbe verificarsi entro i prossimi 2-3 mesi.

Anche se la bassa attività solare sembra essere una situazione favorevole per la Terra, gli scienziati nei loro “previsioni apocalittiche,” paradossalmente, raramente li associano con l’alta attività del Sole e d’altra parte, con apprensione sono bassi. È causato dal fatto che il Sole nella storia accessibile all’umanità non ha mai prodotto super-bagliori capaci di influenzare la vita. I periodi del “congelamento” del ciclo solare nella storia sono stati osservati e hanno mostrato una correlazione con il clima. In particolare, l’ultima cosiddetta Piccola Età Glaciale nella storia della Terra, che è stata osservata a livello della giunzione dei secoli 17 ° e 18 ha coinciso con il fallimento nota del ciclo solare (il minimo di Maunder), durante il quale il sole per quasi 50 anni, quasi senza macchie – che è, L’attività si bloccò per diversi decenni nel punto minimo.

I timori circa se il Sole uscirà dal minimo successivo e se ci sarà un malfunzionamento, durante il quale rimarrà in esso, saranno espressi all’approssimarsi di ogni minimo solare. Negli ultimi 200 anni, tuttavia, non ci sono state ripetizioni della situazione con il minimo di Maunder. Da ciò che è visibile sul Sole ora, la sua evoluzione è ancora in piena conformità con il comportamento osservato durante i precedenti cicli di 11 anni. Quello che accadrà dopo, mostrerà ulteriori ricerche.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Economia e Produzione Industriale, Energie Alternative, Unione Europea

Germania. Kontrordine, kompagni. Il carbone è bello, buono ed anche profumato.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-11-14.

Ciminiere Tedesche

Ma allora Mr Trump aveva ragione….

Le ciminiere tedesche non inquinano.


I liberal democratici ed i socialisti ideologi non hanno il senso dello humour. Non sanno né sorridere né ridere di sé stessi.

Inoltre, presumono che tutti gli altri siano scemi e che siano anche smemorati.

Correva il giorno del Signore, il 29 giugno 2017: questo era il titolo di un giornale internazionale.

Merkel to put climate change at centre of G20 talks after Trump’s Paris pullout

«German chancellor says Trump administration’s decision to quit Paris climate agreement means EU must show leadership on issue. ….

Tackling climate change will be one of the central tasks of the upcoming Hamburg G20 summit of the world’s largest economies, the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, said on Thursday, following the US withdrawal from the Paris climate pact. ….

Merkel …. said the climate change scepticism of the Trump administration made it all the more important for the European Union to show leadership ….

Since the decision of the US to quit the Paris climate agreement, we are more determined than ever to make it successful,” she said. “We must tackle this existential challenge, and we cannot wait until every last person on earth has been convinced of the scientific proof.” ….

windfarms in the northernmost states are producing so much energy that in some cases the state has to pay renewable energy companies to switch off their turbines to stop congesting the power grid»

*

Giorni or sono la confindustri tedesca aveva preso severe posizioni.

«Germany Needs Gas, Not Hot Air»

*

«Germany should ditch its national CO2 emissions targets, end its plans to expand solar and wind power and embrace natural gas instead.»

*

«There has probably never been a project in Germany before in which the gap between aspirations, goals and reality has been as wide as it is with the transition to green energy. When it comes to the “Energiewende,” it is no longer facts that count, but ideology and the pushing of scenarios that have little or nothing to do with reality.»

*

«The reality is that Germany still lacks the grids for transporting electricity from the renewables-dense north to the south, and that in 2016 electricity consumers had to pay around €1 billion to fire up old oil-powered plants in the south when wind power dropped in the north»

* * * * * * *

Queste semplicissime considerazioni si sono riverberate sulle trattative per la formazione di un qualche governo in Germania.

Franza o Spagna purchè se magna

«Germany’s Green party has agreed to compromise on key environmental issues in talks between parties hoping to form a coalition government by the end of the year»

*

«The party’s decision to back down on its insistence over a ban on combustion engines and the closing down of coal-fired power plants was welcomed by the other negotiating parties»

*

«the Greens said they were ready to admit that their goal of a ban on combustion engines by 2030 was unrealistic»

*

«The FDP is strictly against a quick pull-out from coal-fired power»

*

«The CSU in particular has indicated its readiness to move to the right in order to claw back the millions of voters both parties lost to the rightwing populist Alternative für Deutschland (AfD).»

* * * * * * *

Bene.

Adesso che pur di fare un qualsiasi governo ed accomodarsi a tavola con tovagliolo al collo, coltello nella destra e forchetta nella sinistra, Frau Merkel ed i Grüne ammettono che tutte le loro ubbie erano “unrealistic“.

E l’Europa ha speso in venti anni quasi 4,500 miliardi in un progetto utopico, che è servito solo a foraggiare liberal e socialisti ideologici.

Se si fosse persone serie si dovrebbero confiscare tutti i beni personali e di partito dei socialdemocratici, dei cristiano democratici e dei Grüne.

Parlano tanto di morale questa gente, ma rendere la refurtiva è anch’esso un obbligo morale, esattamente come le dimissioni.


The Guardian. 2017-11-12. German Greens drop car and coal policies in coalition talks with Merkel

Decision to drop key issues welcomed by other negotiating parties but criticised by some supporters.

*

Germany’s Green party has agreed to compromise on key environmental issues in talks between parties hoping to form a coalition government by the end of the year.

The party’s decision to back down on its insistence over a ban on combustion engines and the closing down of coal-fired power plants was welcomed by the other negotiating parties as paving the way for official negotiations to begin.

But the news was met with disgruntlement by some Green supporters, who fear the party’s leaders are in danger of watering down some of their core environmental policies in return for entering government.

Angela Merkel’s conservative alliance, the pro-business liberal Free Democratic party (FDP) and the Greens are jostling for their positions in what has been dubbed the Jamaica coalition, due to the match between the parties’ colours and the yellow, green and black Jamaican flag.

After the latest round of exploratory talks between the parties, the Greens said they were ready to admit that their goal of a ban on combustion engines by 2030 was unrealistic.

“It is clear to me that we will not be able to enforce a ban on internal combustion engines by 2030,” the Greens’ co-leader Cem Özdemir told Stuttgarter Zeitung.

The Greens are also prepared to modify their demand that the 20 most polluting coal-fired power plants in Germany should be shut by 2020.

The FDP is strictly against a quick pull-out from coal-fired power. The party’s leader, Christian Lindner, said he would prefer to see more development aid pumped into climate protection instead, suggesting that Germany might suffer energy supply shortfalls if power stations were shut down. The Greens insist Germany produces far more electricity than it needs so shortages are not to be feared.

The Greens’ parliamentary leader, Anton Hofreiter, has signalled that in return he expected the other parties to make compromises over the Greens’ proposal to make it easier for families of refugees in Germany to be able to join them.

Both Merkel’s CDU and its Bavarian sister party the CSU are meanwhile keen to assert their leadership having suffered historic losses in September’s election. The CSU in particular has indicated its readiness to move to the right in order to claw back the millions of voters both parties lost to the rightwing populist Alternative für Deutschland (AfD).

The presence of the AfD in the Bundestag has given the negotiators an extra impetus with the participants publicly acknowledging the need to pull together to create a strong and stable government.

Germany has never before had a coalition between the conservatives, liberals and Greens on the national level, where the parties’ vast differences have been seen as too great.

Merkel has said she expects the exploratory talks to be completed soon, so that official negotiations can begin on 16 November. A coalition is not expected to be finalised before Christmas.

She has warned against the suggestion made by Lindner of new elections as an alternative should the talks fail. “It is not clever to be constantly talking in public about new elections,” she said, noting that the parties had a national responsibility to form a stable government.