Pubblicato in: Cina, Economia e Produzione Industriale, Medio Oriente, Problemia Energetici

Cina & Arabia Saudita. Accordo da 10b$ forniture materiale per petrolio.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-03-05.

Gufo_019__

«Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman continued a charm offensive in a two-day visit to China, signing off on a $10 billion oil deal, and pledged assistance in the “de-radicalisation of extremist thinking.”»

*

«Saudi Arabia on Friday signed the next multi-billion oil refinery investment deal during Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s tour of Asia, this time in China»

*

«Riyadh’s state-owned oil giant Saudi Aramco announced a $10 billion (€8.82 billion) joint venture to develop a facility in China’s north east»

*

«This, among other deals hashed out in 35 memorandums of understanding, could see it regain its place as China’s main oil exporter. The countries saw a 33 percent increase in bilateral trade last year, according to the crown prince»

*

«Over such long periods of exchanges with China, we have never experienced any problems»

*

«All countries in the world have the right to develop, and Saudi Arabia is an emerging market country with enormous potential»

* * * * * * * *

Cina. 1000TTP. Ne ignorate la esistenza. Domani vi mangerete le dita.

La guerra della Cina all’islam. Spie nelle famiglie e repressione

Cinesi, gente pratica. Risolto il problema dell’integralismo islamico.

*

Come si constata, questo è un ottimo esempio di Realpolitik.

I Sauditi si sono dimenticati del milione di mussulmani internati nel Laogai per essere rieducati (usciranno quando parleranno fluentemente il mandarino), e la Cina si è dimenticata che era stata proprio l’Arabia Saudita che finanziava i terroristi islamici.

In fondo, la Cina ha bisogno di petrolio e l’Arabia Saudita, che lo estrae, ha ben bisogno di acquirenti.

Si vorrebbe forse cavillare sui problemi interni di un paese amico?


Deutsche Welle. 2019-02-22. Saudi Arabia crown prince strikes oil deal in China

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman continued a charm offensive in a two-day visit to China, signing off on a $10 billion oil deal, and pledged assistance in the “de-radicalisation of extremist thinking.”

*

Saudi Arabia on Friday signed the next multi-billion oil refinery investment deal during Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s tour of Asia, this time in China.

Riyadh’s state-owned oil giant Saudi Aramco announced a $10 billion (€8.82 billion) joint venture to develop a facility in China’s north east.

This, among other deals hashed out in 35 memorandums of understanding, could see it regain its place as China’s main oil exporter. The countries saw a 33 percent increase in bilateral trade last year, according to the crown prince.

“Saudi Arabia’s relations with China can be traced back a very long time in the past,” bin Salman said.

“Over such long periods of exchanges with China, we have never experienced any problems.”

His counterpart, Chinese President Xi Jinping, expressed a similar sentiment. “China is a good friend and a partner to Saudi Arabia,” he said.

Bin Salman and his party arrived in the Chinese capital on Thursday after stops in India and Pakistan.

China for its part, was hoping to tap into the “enormous potential” of the Saudi economy and “deepen cooperation.”

“All countries in the world have the right to develop, and Saudi Arabia is an emerging market country with enormous potential,” Foreign Minister Wang Yi said.

The two countries have been pursuing separate, but equally ambitious economic plans. China has been securing partnerships for its Belt and Road Initiative – a $900 billion trade corridor from Asia to Europe.

Likewise, Riyadh has been pursuing the “Saudi Vision 2030”, to diversify Saudi Arabia’s economy from oil.

Talking terror

The two sides also discussed increased cooperation in areas like anti-terrorism, law enforcement and security. China expressed interested in exchanging experiences about de-radicalization, a likely reference to “internment camps” in the country’s west, set up to “educate” Muslims and Uighurs.

Such camps have drawn sharp condemnation, a UN committee describing the autonomous region as “something that resembles a massive internment camp that is shrouded in secrecy”, housing some one million Uighurs.

But the Saudi crown prince said his country was against “interference by external forces in China’s internal affairs”, saying that it “firmly supported” Beijing’s so-called security efforts.

The Saudi visit comes amid global criticism over the killing of journalist Jamal Khashogghi as well as the country’s human rights record and its role in the conflict in Yemen.

The crown prince is expected to leave Beijing Friday night, moving on to South Korea.

Annunci
Pubblicato in: Economia e Produzione Industriale, Problemia Energetici

Dodici superpetroliere in zavorra. Il petrolio è un problema complesso.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-02-27.

Pere Borrel del Caso. Sfuggendo alla critica.

Il problema del petrolio o, più in generale, dei combustibili fossili, mal si presta a generalizzazioni avventate che sicuramente sembrerebbero facilitare la comprensione dei fenomeni ma altrettanto sicuramente tendono ad enfatizzare  aspetti parziali quasi estinguessero il tutto.

Uno dei più misconosciuti problemi è l’intimo legame che intercorre tra il crudo estratto e la raffineria che lo trasformerà in idrocarburi utilizzabili. Ogni tipo di estratto necessita di essere lavorato in una sua propria raffineria, che potrebbe essere collocata in un altro continente. In parole miserrime, il produttore di petrolio conta ovviamente molto, ma senza l’accesso alle raffinerie, conta poco o punto.

«Ships are sailing without cargo after producers cut exports»

*

«Booming U.S. shipments still need to go to Asian refineries»

*

«They are slowly plowing their way across thousands of miles of ocean toward America’s Gulf of Mexico coastline»

*

«As they do, twelve empty supertankers are also revealing a few truths about today’s global oil market.»

*

«In normal times, the vessels would be filled with heavy, high sulfur Middle East oil for delivery to refineries in places like Houston or New Orleans. Not now though. They are sailing cargo-less, a practice that vessel owners normally try to avoid because ships earn money by making deliveries»

*

«The 12 vessels are making voyages of as much as 21,000 miles direct from Asia, all the way around South Africa, holding nothing but seawater for stability because Middle East producers are restricting supplies. Still, America’s booming volumes of light crude must still be exported, and there aren’t enough supertankers in the Atlantic Ocean for the job. So they’re coming empty»

*

«The U.S. both exports and imports large amounts of crude because the variety it pumps — especially newer supplies from shale formations — is very different from the type that’s found in the Middle East. OPEC members are likely cutting heavier grades while American exports are predominantly lighter»

* * * * * * * *

The great oil paradox: too many good crudes not enough bad ones.

«The shale boom has created a world awash with crude, putting a lid on prices and markedly reducing U.S. dependence on imported energy. But there’s a growing problem: America is producing the wrong kind of oil.

Texas and other shale-rich states are spewing a gusher of high-quality crude — light-sweet in the industry parlance — feeding a growing glut that’s bending the global oil industry out of shape.

Refiners who invested billions to turn a profit from processing cheap low-quality crude are paying unheard of premiums to find the heavy-sour grades they need. The mismatch is better news for OPEC producers like Iraq and Saudi Arabia, who don’t produce much light-sweet, but pump plenty of the dirtier stuff.

The crisis in Venezuela, together with OPEC output cuts, will exacerbate the mismatch. The South American producer exports some of the world’s heaviest oil and Trump administration sanctions announced this week will make processing and exporting crude far more difficult. American refiners are scrambling for alternative supplies at very short notice.»

*

Già.

Problemi che, se banalizzati, sembrerebbero essere semplici, all’improvviso evidenziano dei paradossi conflittuali: le vecchie regole sono inadatte a descrivere il fenomeno attuale.


Bloomberg. 2019-02-23. Twelve Empty Supertankers Reveal Truths About Today’s Oil Market

– Ships are sailing without cargo after producers cut exports

– Booming U.S. shipments still need to go to Asian refineries

*

They are slowly plowing their way across thousands of miles of ocean toward America’s Gulf of Mexico coastline. As they do, twelve empty supertankers are also revealing a few truths about today’s global oil market.

In normal times, the vessels would be filled with heavy, high sulfur Middle East oil for delivery to refineries in places like Houston or New Orleans. Not now though. They are sailing cargo-less, a practice that vessel owners normally try to avoid because ships earn money by making deliveries.

The 12 vessels are making voyages of as much as 21,000 miles direct from Asia, all the way around South Africa, holding nothing but seawater for stability because Middle East producers are restricting supplies. Still, America’s booming volumes of light crude must still be exported, and there aren’t enough supertankers in the Atlantic Ocean for the job. So they’re coming empty.

“What’s driving this is a U.S. oil market that’s looking relatively bearish with domestic production estimates trending higher, and persistent crude oil builds we have seen for the last few weeks,” said Warren Patterson, head of commodities strategy at ING Bank NV in Amsterdam. “At the same time, OPEC cuts are supporting international grades like Brent, creating an export incentive.”

The U.S. both exports and imports large amounts of crude because the variety it pumps — especially newer supplies from shale formations — is very different from the type that’s found in the Middle East. OPEC members are likely cutting heavier grades while American exports are predominantly lighter, Patterson said.

Gasoline Glut

By industry standards, American oil is considered light and low in sulfur, making it great for churning out gasoline, with the result that a glut of the automotive fuel is starting to build up. By contrast, Middle East crude often needs more processing — not a problem for Gulf of Mexico plants that were designed specifically for that task — but it can have a smaller gasoline yield.

“There is still going to be a lot of growth from U.S. tight oil this year,” said James Davis, director of short-term global oil service at Facts Global Energy. “This will continue to push U.S. exports up.”

Shippers are counting on the U.S. exports to help the tanker market withstand supply restrictions by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and allies including Russia. Industry analysts, who actually raised their estimates for what they think the ships will earn this year after the OPEC+ pact was announced in December, are citing rising American shipments as a contributing factor.

There are usually three or four empty supertankers — very large crude carriers in industry jargon — that would sail empty to the U.S. at any one time, according to shipbrokers.

The shift has produced knock-on effects around the shipping market. Daily earnings for the VLCCs, which can haul two million barrels of oil, on the benchmark Middle East-to-China route doubled since last week to $29,494, according to Baltic Exchange data.

“Following a fixing frenzy from the U.S. Gulf Coast late last week, most available tonnage in the Atlantic basin has been soaked up,” said Espen Fjermestad, an analyst at Fearnley Securities AS in Oslo. “With ships ballasting West, rates have shifted up also in the East.”

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Problemia Energetici, Senza categoria, Unione Europea

Nucleare. Si inizia a rivalutarlo. Il declino dei liberal. – Bbc.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-02-07.

2019-01-19__nucleare__001

Per vivere, e possibilmente crescere, il mondo ha bisogno non solo di energia, ma soprattutto di energia a costi ragionevoli.

Stanno arrivando i tempi nei quali i conti devono essere fatti in modo accurato.

Di questi tempi la Cina ha cessato le sovvenzioni statali alle energie alternative che si sono dimostrate essere antieconomiche ed ha annunciato che intende aumentare del 25% la quota di energia ottenuta bruciando carbone.

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

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

Simultaneamente, la Cina ha lanciato un consistente piano di costruzione di centrali atomiche.

Cina. Centrali elettriche nucleari. 37 reattori attivi, 60 in costruzione, 179 programmati.

Cina. In funzione a Taishan il primo reattore nucleare Epr.

* * * * * * *

Per quanti abbiano memoria storica, i Meeting di Davos erano stati le celebrazioni sacrali del ‘clima’ e della fine del carbone, il cui uso avrebbe dovuto scomparire dalla faccia della terra.

Ma questo anno non saranno presenti né il Presidente Trump né il Presidente Xi.

Davos assomiglia sempre più ad un nobile decaduto che vive sotto i ponti di un rigagnolo, vendendosi gli ultimi pezzi del servizio di argento per comprarsi un tozzo di pane.

Davos, Merkel ‘sostituisce’ Trump al Forum fra le nevi

«Si aprirà a Davos il 22 e fino al 25 gennaio il consueto appuntamento con il World Economic Forum, l’incontro con il gotha politico ed economico del mondo.

Via Trump, arriva la Merkel. Per un presidente americano che non sarà presente quest’anno al Forum economico mondiale, causa i guai in casa legati allo scontro con i democratici e allo ‘shutdown’, arriva a sorpresa una cancelliera tedesca che in molti, oggi, considerano l’ultimo baluardo della globalizzazione e del mondo liberale. ….

Vistosa anche l’assenza della figlia Ivanka e del genero Jared Kushner. Così come quest’anno è assente Xi Jinping, primo presidente cinese al Wef che nel 2017 lanciò una controffensiva a suo modo globalista. ….

Impegnato da guai domestici (gilet gialli) anche il presidente francese Emmanuel Macron, l’Europa vedrà una folta rappresentanza della Commissione Ue (da Barnier a Katainen, dalla Malmstrom a Moscovici a Oettinger)»

* * * * * * *

Con Mr Macron e Frau Merkel ridotti a molto meno delle anatre zoppe, il ‘clima‘ non ha più potentati politici di appoggio, quelli che stabilivano per legge quale dovesse essere la verità scientifica del momento, traendone quindi le conseguenze per i propri sodali.

Non stupisce quindi l’editoriale della Bbc, la Masada dei liberal socialisti, in cui l’articolista si interroga se il nucleare non sia la risposta corretta ai crescenti bisogni energetici mondiali.

È un pezzo di rara fattura per il preziosismo formale di un inglese che cerca di dire senza volerlo fare apertamente. È un apprezzabile esercizio di contorsionismo logico, logico si fa per dire. Ricorda da vicino lo stile con il quale l’on. De Mita di infausta memoria scriveva le proprie relazioni.

Ancora qualche anno di pazienza, e poi l’Unione Europea marcerà tranquillamente con centrali a carbone affiancate da quelle atomiche.


Bbc. 2019-01-18. Climate change: Is nuclear power the answer?

Nuclear is good for the environment. Nuclear is bad for the environment. Both statements are true.

Why is it good? Nuclear power is planned to be a key part of the UK’s energy mix.

The key benefit is that it helps keep the lights on while producing hardly any of the CO2 emissions that are heating the climate.

CO2 emissions come from traditional ways of creating electricity such as burning gas and coal.

And the government is expected to have halted emissions almost completely by 2050, to help curb damage to the climate.

Why is it bad for the environment?

Because major nuclear accidents are few and far between, but when they happen they create panic.

Take the Fukushima explosions in 2011, which released radioactive material into the surrounding air in Japan. Or the Chernobyl accident in 1986, which spewed radioactive material across northern Europe.

But arguably, the bigger environmental problem is what to do with nuclear waste.

This is a very live issue in the UK, where contaminated material has been held in a temporary store at the Sellafield site in Cumbria.

The government has been trying for years to secure a site with the right geology, offering cash sweeteners to local communities to host a permanent £12bn underground store for the most dangerous waste. So far no permanent dump has been agreed – that is after 70 years of nuclear power in the UK.

Can we get by without new nuclear?

“The UK policy identifying the need for nuclear to play a role alongside renewables has been supported by numerous independent studies,” said a spokesperson for EDF, which is building the Hinkley C nuclear power plant.

“Nuclear provides low-carbon electricity when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine.”

Previously civil servants estimated that future UK energy supplies would be divided up roughly 30/30/30 between nuclear, wind and fossil fuels with carbon capture and storage (CCS).

But no-one has been willing to invest at scale in the expensive CCS technology, which pumps CO2 emissions into rocks.

Wind is ready to take its place in the sun. But with old nuclear stations closing, nuclear won’t be able to fulfil its third of the deal unless new nuclear plants are built.

The issue has caused a bitter divide between environmentalists, with some arguing that the risk from climate change is so severe that it’s worth supping nuclear fuel, albeit with a long spoon.

Others argue that the technology is dead and that renewables and other options can supply the UK’s needs without the danger of nuclear accidents and waste.

Prof Jim Watson, director of the UK Energy Research Centre, told BBC News: “Most analysts now have accepted that we don’t need 30% of energy from nuclear – renewables can take a substantially bigger share.

“But taking any option off the table makes the job of meeting essential carbon targets even harder. It would certainly be hard to do without nuclear altogether.”

What are the alternatives?

The people who keep our lights on are looking to find ways of extending the life of existing nuclear plants, and trying to get nuclear power more cheaply.

Factory-built small modular reactors that can be delivered on the back of a lorry are touted as one solution – but they are not expected to be operating at any scale until well into the 2030s. And what’s more, with nuclear, bigger is generally better.

Meanwhile, other options are being urgently explored. We need the power market to be more flexible. We need to develop better batteries and other techniques for storing power.

And we need systems that will reduce the demand for electricity at peak times and transfer the demand to off-peak times when wind energy is plentiful and cheap.

One particularly hard task is to find ways of storing power between months and even seasons.

Last but by no means least, the government needs to prompt people to insulate their homes to reduce the demand for energy in the first place.

The news that Hitachi is suspending work on a nuclear plant in north Wales has made all these tasks more urgent.

Pubblicato in: Problemia Energetici, Senza categoria

Turk Stream. Bulgaria approva il progetto.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-02-06.

2019-02-02__TurkStream__001

Basterebbe una occhiata distratta alla mappa per comprendere l’importanza del Turk Stream.

Il problema di interesse è il bypassare l’Ukraina, a causa della sua instabilità politica attuale e, prevedibilmente, futura.

Come si constata, il gasdotto parte dalla Russia per approdare nella Turkia continentale a Klylkog.

Di lì si biforca. Una parte attraversa la Grecia e in breve tratto l’Albania, confluendo quindi in Italia tramite le linee Poseidon e Trans Adriatic Pipeline.

La quota maggiore invece è dirottata attraverso la Bulgaria alla Serbia e, quindi all’Ungheria, Slovakia ed all’Austria.

È previsto, infine, un raccordo con la Polonia.


EnergingEurope. 2019-02-01. Bulgaria gives green light to TurkStream

Bulgaria has successfully completed a third market test for the Turkish Stream natural gas pipeline, known as TurkStream, and will move forward with plans to join the project.

“We have very good news. The economic test for a project to expand the gas network has been successfully completed,” Bulgaria’s Minister of Energy Temenuzhka Petkova announced.

In December 2018, Ms Petkova said that Bulgaria will spend 1.4 billion euros to build the new gas link to Turkey.

TurkStream is part of the Russia’s plans to bypass Ukraine, currently the main transit route for Russian gas to Europe and strengthen its position in the European market. The pipeline will transport Russian gas from Bulgaria’s border with Turkey to Serbia.

“Energy analysts have expressed concerns that with the process Gazprom will be cementing its dominant position as gas provider in south-eastern Europe. At present, Bulgaria meets all of its gas needs with Gazprom’s supplies,” commented Reuters

Gazprom has determined the itinerary of the second line of the TurkStream pipeline will span Bulgaria and Serbia starting from 2020, then go through Hungary and Slovakia from 2021 and the second half of 2022, respectively.

“The biggest bulk of the capacity has been booked by Gazprom. This way the Russian company is strengthening its dominant position in the region,” said Martin Vladimirov of the independent think tank Centre for the Study of Democracy.

Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic announced earlier in January that construction of TurkStream through Serbia, from Russia via Bulgaria, would start “in the next couple of weeks, maybe even days.”

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

Germania. Abbandonare il carbone comporta aumenti del 20% agli utenti.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-02-02.

2019-01-30__carbone__001

«German consumers already currently pay the highest prices for electricity in Europe.»

*

«The phasing out of coal-based power generation in Germany could push up electricity costs by 20 percent»

*

«According to various studies on this topic, the phasing out of coal could raise the price of electricity on the stock exchange by around 20 percent or one cent per kilowatt hour»

*

«Electricity will be more expensive anyway, because the expansion of renewables will be financed by the EEG (Renewable Energy Sources Act) levy and grid fees will rise»

*

«The affected regions, where tens of thousands of jobs directly or indirectly linked to brown-and black-coal energy production, will receive €40 billion as compensation over the next two decades»

*

«Only one eighth of the 7700-kilometre electricity grid expansion in Germany has been completed»

* * * * * * *

Passare dal carbone alle alternative comporta un aumento in bolletta del 20%.

Se questo aumento va a gravare immediatamente sull’utenza finale, si dovrebbero conteggiare anche gli aumenti indotti.

Il panettiere che cuoce il pane in un forno elettrico, pagherà la corrente il 20% di più, così come per la illuminazione e per qualsiasi elettrodomestico usi nella lavorazione. L’impastatrice elettrica consuma molto. Ovviamente, il prezzo del pane dovrà salire.

Ma similmente, l’officina meccanica che ha tutte le apparecchiature che funzionano a corrente elettrica si troverà una lunga serie di aggravi, e quindi dovrà aumentare i prezzi.

Infine, 6,000 kilometri di grid non son mica poi tanto pochi, e giù altri miliardi che se ne vanno.

* * *

Sembra impossibile, ma al momento è impossibile trovare un conteggio totale di tutti i costi riuniti in un unico schema.

Sorge quindi naturale una domanda.

Riusciranno i tedeschi a sopportare i pesi del passaggio da carbone ad alternative?

Sono in molti che ne dubitano fortemente.

Nota.

Un po’ cinicamente si potrebbe dire che se il piano si articola fino al 2038, tra due anni in Germania si terranno nuove elezioni politiche ed è tutto da vedere se questo piano risulterà essere ancora nell’agenda di quello che sarà il nuovo governo.


The Local. 2019-01-30. Electricity prices could rise by 20 percent due to coal withdrawal

The phasing out of coal-based power generation in Germany could push up electricity costs by 20 percent, according to experts.

That’s the findings from the RWI Institute who say Germany’s exit from coal is going to be expensive for consumers and taxpayers, the Rheinishe Post reported Tuesday.

Germans are already paying the highest prices for electricity in Europe, the newspaper reported. It came as around 9,000 employees of energy giant RWE Power wait for details on job cuts.

“According to various studies on this topic, the phasing out of coal could raise the price of electricity on the stock exchange by around 20 percent or one cent per kilowatt hour,” Manuel Frondel, energy expert at the RWI Leibniz Institute for Economic Research in Essen, told the Rheinishe Post.

For a three-person household with an annual consumption of typically 4000 kilowatt hours, this would mean €40 in additional costs per year.

“Electricity will be more expensive anyway, because the expansion of renewables will be financed by the EEG (Renewable Energy Sources Act) levy and grid fees will rise,” said Thilo Schaefer of the Institute of German Business.

Schaefer also said that in the medium term, getting rid of plants that use lignite or brown coal will eliminate a cheap way of generating electricity.

As The Local has reported, the Coal Commission has recommended phasing out coal by 2038 and shutting down around 12.5 of the 43 gigawatts of coal-fired power plant capacity by 2022.

The commission’s findings will now be passed on to the government, which is expected – barring a surprise – to follow the recommendations of the panel it set up.

Under the plan, several plants that use lignite or brown coal, which is more polluting than black coal, will be closed by 2022. Other plants will follow until 2030, when only 17 gigawatts of Germany’s electricity will be supplied by coal, compared to today’s 45 gigawatts. 

The last plant will close in 2038 at the latest, the commission said, but did not rule out moving this date forward to 2035 if conditions permit.

The affected regions, where tens of thousands of jobs directly or indirectly linked to brown-and black-coal energy production, will receive €40 billion as compensation over the next two decades.

Although more and more wind turbines and solar plants are being installed, they often do not supply enough electricity because they depend on weather conditions.

Can electricity consumers be relieved?

The Commission advises the federal government to relieve consumers of two billion euros in network charges. But it is still unclear how this will be done and whether the EU will participate. According to RWI expert Frondel, electricity tax could be reduced by around a third with two billion euros, i.e. from two cents per kilowatt hour to around 1.3 cents. “But it is still unclear how electricity consumers will be relieved,” Frondel said.

However, this would not assist the industry, experts say. “If the €2 billion were used to reduce the electricity tax, for example, the industry would not be helped because of its exemption from the electricity tax,” said Frondel.

The CDU Economic Council is also concerned. They say the electricity supply must remain secure and affordable and that the expansion of the grid must be accelerated. Only one eighth of the 7700-kilometre electricity grid expansion in Germany has been completed. Meanwhile, German consumers already currently pay the highest prices for electricity in Europe.

“The government will do everything it can to protect consumers from rising electricity prices by switching from coal to renewable energy,” said Federal Minister for Economic Affairs and Energy Peter Altmaier, of the centre-right Christian Democrats (CDU).

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

Germania. Il business dell’abbandono del carbone.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-01-31.

brueghel il giovane. pagamento delle tasse. fisher_museum_of_art

«A government-appointed coal commission on Saturday set a 2038 deadline for Germany to shutter coal mines and electricity plants powered by black or brown coal»

Resta davvero difficile comprendere l’attaccamento dei liberal socialisti tedeschi al ‘clima‘ ed all’abbandono del carbone, che abbonda in Germania, se non si tenessero presenti alcuni dati ed alcune considerazioni. In quel momento tutto diventa chiaro, chiarissimo. Prima ripassiamo i dati.

*

Al momento attuale la Germania produce corrente elettrica bruciando carbone per circa il 35% dei consumi. Il carbone è estratto sul territorio tedesco e la relativa industria di estrazione, trattamento ed applicazioni varie – per esempio la siderurgia – danno lavoro  circa 300,000 persone fisse ed a 100,000 altre avventizie.

Alcune considerazioni.

Considerazione numero uno. Il 2038 è tra venti anni. Frau Merkel e gli attuali politici si saranno da tempo ritirati, e nulla vieterebbe di pensare che quelli loro subentranti la pensassero in modo diametralmente opposto. Come argutamente diceva Herr Schäuble posso rubare tutto, la le miniere restano lì, ancorché chiuse.

Considerazione numero due. La Germania ha un problema demografico da spavento. Le femmine tedesche autoctone non figliano, non procreano. Destatis, l’Istituto federale di Statistica riporta una popolazione attuale di 80.8milioni di abitanti, dei quali 49.2 milioni sono i metà lavorativa, dai 20 ai 64 anni. Ma al 2038 la popolazione si sarà ridotta a 67.6 milioni, con 34.6 milioni di persone in età lavorativa. Se la popolazione totale sarà calata di 13.2 milioni, quella in età lavorativa sarà calata di 14.6 milioni di unità. Una perdita percentuale del 29.67%.

Ma ad un calo così consistente della popolazione attiva corrisponderà una proporzionale riduzione dei consumi energetici: a lume di naso, di un buon 30%.

Considerazione numero tre. Se si guardassero proiezioni più a lungo termine, i quadri dipinti da Destati sono ancor più foschi. Nulla quindi da stupirsi se in Germania si inizia a pensare ad una tassa sul nubilato.

Germania. Herr Spahn prospetta la tassa sul nubilato.

Basterà solo avere pazienza ed aspettare che i tedeschi arrivino alla fase di terrore. La storia insegna come siano levi nell’attesa ed iperattivi nell’emergenza.

Considerazione numero quattro. Realizzare i propri sogni ha un costo. Chi volesse proprio comparsi una Lamborghini dovrebbe dar fondo ai risparmi e tener presente che una simile automobile ha un costo di gestione non da poco.

Lasciare il carbone, che ricordiamo è estratto in patria, significa accollarsi le spese di chiusura, quelle di costruzione di nuovi impianti, ed infine pagare la bolletta energetica di acquisto dei combustibili sul mercato estero. E questo proprio quando la Cina ha dichiarato che incrementerà la produzione di energia da carbone di almeno il 25%.

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

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

Nordrhein-Westfalen presenta un conto da 11.5 miliardi per il carbone.

* * *

Aggiungeremo citando alcune informazioni, poi potremo concludere il ragionamento.

«There will be “significant” job losses as Germany phases out coal use by 2038 as part of efforts to combat climate change, energy giant RWE’s CEO Rolf Martin warned on Monday»

*

«A government-appointed coal commission on Saturday set a 2038 deadline for Germany to shutter coal mines and electricity plants powered by black or brown coal»

*

«It also recommended some €40 billion euros be set aside to help coal-reliant regions with the transition, including through retraining younger workers and early retirement schemes for others»

*

«Energy companies can also expect billions in compensation»

* * * * * * * *

E se facessimo quattro conti della serva?

Chiudere le centrali elettriche alimentate a carbone, e con esse terminare l’estrazione del carbone, verrà a costare grosso modo quaranta miliardi di refusioni ai Länder, 40 miliardi per la costruzione delle nuove centrali non alimentate a carbone, 40 miliardi di refusione alle società estrattrici ed infine un trenta miliardi all’anno di acquisto di combustibili quali il gas naturale russo. Una rapida somma: centosettanta miliardi.

I tedeschi saranno ecologicamente puliti, anche se resteranno auto e camion, per non parlare poi del riscaldamento degli immobili, ma dovranno cavarsi dalle tasche un gran bella cifretta.

* * * * * * *

Ma donde li piglierà la Germania tutti quei soldi?

Banale la risposta.

Li pagheranno tutti i sodali dell’Unione Europea, Italia in testa.

Forse che gli stati membri dell’Unione verrebbero che la Germania continui a bruciare carbone, maleodorante e che sporca tutto?

Ma per un pura coincidenza del destino, tutte le società che gestiscono le energie alternative in Germania sono di proprietà di liberal socialisti. Hanno assunto solo e soltanto liberal socialisti. È in pratica cosa loro.

Questi, annusata l’aria di devoluzione, hanno pensato bene di trovarsi un posto di lavoro assicurato e redditizio.

Fiumi di denaro che saranno prudentemente investiti all’estero.

Fiumi di denaro pubblico che finiranno nelle loro capienti scarselle.

Les jeux sont faits, rien ne va plus.

Poi non ci si lamenti se gli identitari sovranisti crescono.


The Local. 2019-01-28. Energy giant warns of ‘significant’ job losses over Germany’s coal phase out

There will be “significant” job losses as Germany phases out coal use by 2038 as part of efforts to combat climate change, energy giant RWE’s CEO Rolf Martin warned on Monday.

“We can’t exactly say yet how many employees will be affected,” Martin told the Rheinische Post newspaper.

“But I expect a significant reduction as soon as 2023, which goes far beyond current planning and what can be done through normal fluctuations.”

A government-appointed coal commission on Saturday set a 2038 deadline for Germany to shutter coal mines and electricity plants powered by black or brown coal.

It also recommended some €40 billion euros be set aside to help coal-reliant regions with the transition, including through retraining younger workers and early retirement schemes for others.

Energy companies can also expect billions in compensation.

Coal, the dirtiest of all fossil fuels, last year accounted for more than 30 percent of Germany’s energy mix.

RWE, the biggest operator of coal-fired plants in Germany, has for years been warning of the negative impact the exit from coal would have on jobs and energy security in Germany.

Some 20,000 people are directly employed in the coal industry in Europe’s top economy.

It is now up to the German government to implement the commission’s recommendations.

A meeting between Chancellor Angela Merkel, Finance Minister Olaf Scholz and regional leaders to discuss the proposals is scheduled to take place on Thursday.

Germany’s reliance on dirty coal is in part down to Merkel’s decision in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima disaster to ditch nuclear power by 2022.

But the use of the polluting fuel has complicated Germany’s efforts to stick to targets for limiting greenhouse gas emissions, undermining Merkel’s role as a leading advocate of the global Paris Climate Agreement.

Under the commission’s plans, power plants in Germany using lignite or brown coal, which is even more polluting than black coal, would be closed by 2022.

Other plants will follow until 2030, when only 17 gigawatts of Germany’s electricity will be supplied by coal, compared to today’s 45 gigawatts.

The last plant will close in 2038 at the latest, the commission said, but it did not rule out moving this date forward to 2035 if conditions permit.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Economia e Produzione Industriale, Problemia Energetici, Unione Europea

Nordrhein-Westfalen presenta un conto da 11.5 miliardi per il carbone.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-01-19.

nordrhein-westfalen. 001

Il Nordrhein-Westfalen è uno dei Land tedeschi che meglio evidenzia quanto il quadro politico sia evoluto nel tempo.

Nelle elezioni del 18 settembre 2005 la Cdu ottenne il 34.4%, la Spd il 40.0% ed i Grüne il 10.0% dei voti.

Nelle elezioni del 22 settembre 2009 la Cdu ottenne il 33.1%, la Spd il 28.5% ed i Grüne il 14.9%dei voti validi.

Nelle elezioni del 24 settembre 2017 la Cdu ottenne il 32.6%, la Spd il 26.0% ed i Grüne il 13.1%dei voti validi.

Secondo le più recenti propensioni al voto la Cdu si attesterebbe al 34%, la Spd al 21%, ed i Grüne all’11%. AfD varrebbe il 9%.

*

L’elemento che salta agli occhi immediatamente è sia la sostanziale tenuta della Cdu e dei Grüne, sia il crollo della Spd.

Se è vero che a livello mondiale è in corso la devoluzione dell’ideologia liberal socialista, sarebbe anche vero il dover constatare la deindustrializzazione lenta ma costante e significativa di questo bacino economico. In altri termini, il declino della Spd in questa zone avrebbe due sostanziosi moventi, simultanei e sinergici.

L’industria pesante ha progressivamente lasciato questo enclave produttivo, sia delocalizzando le produzioni sia essendo stato acquisito da capitali stranieri interessati più al know-how che a mantener viva la produzione tedesca: nel converso non è stato possibile impiantare una qualche forma di nuova industria.

*

L’attuale governo federale proprio non ha feeling con l’industria, che guarda financo con sospetto: è estasiato dalle nuove tecnologie al punto tale dal crederle già disponibili e non solo future. Le suppone anche economicamente gratificanti.

Di questi giorni Eurostat ha cacciato benzina sul fuoco rendendo pubblici i dati sulla produzione industriale.

«In November 2018 compared with November 2017, industrial production fell by 3.3% in the euro area and by 2.2% in the EU28 …. Among Member States for which data are available, the largest decreases in industrial production were observed in Ireland (-9.1%), Germany (-5.1%)»

*

La Germania è in crisi o, più verosimilmente, in recessione.

I periodi della vacche grasse sembrerebbero essere terminati.

Prendiamo atto come proprio in un momento così delicato il Governo tedesco intenda abbandonare il carbone quale combustibile per alimentare le centrali elettriche. Se è vero che ognuno sia libero di fare ciò che vuole, sarebbe anche vero il ricordare come lo stato di salute dell’economia tedesca sia strettamente legato a quello dell’Europa e, quindi, anche dell’Italia.

I tedeschi hanno una grande abbondanza di carbone, ancorché buon quota sia costituita dalla lignite. Sarebbero da questo punto di vista autosufficienti energeticamente.

Abbandonare l’uso del carbone implica necessariamente la sostituzione con un qualche altro tipo di combustibile, che necessariamente dovrebbe essere importato.

Non a caso la Cina ha dichiarato di voler incrementare del 25% la quota di corrente elettrica prodotta bruciando carbone: è più economico di altri fonti energetiche.

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

*

Il Land Nordrhein-Westfalen è uno dei grandi produttori tedeschi di lignite: la chiusura di questa industria estrattiva comporterebbe un gran danno per il sistema economico di questa enclave: il governo statale reclamerebbe quindi almeno 11.5 miliardi di Usd quali refusione alla chiusura coatta degli impianti, in ossequio al ‘clima’.

Il Governo federale pagherebbe così tre volte la bolletta energetica: il costo dei combustibili acquistati all’estero, i rimborsi di mancato guadagno in patria, i costi di impianto ed esercizio delle nuove centrali non a carbone.

Non solo.

Anche i Länder della Germania dell’est sono grandi estrattori di carbone: se refusione alla chiusura fosse dovuta al Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, anche i Länder orientale dovrebbero essere rimborsati.

Di rimborsi si potrebbe arrivare a delle cifre da capogiro: tra i trenta ed i quaranta miliardi di euro.

*

Stare alla moda ha un costo, come sanno bene tutte le giovin signore in tiro.

Ma ha un suo costo anche il voler seguire la moda di cambiar tipo di centrale elettrica al mutare dell’ideologia dominante.

Nota Importante.

«Supported by Germany and the EU».

In parole povere, l’Unione Europea, Italia compresa, dovrebbe assecondare i capricci di Frau Merkel, mettendo mano al portafoglio.


Reuters. 2019-01-15. Germany’s biggest state wants at least $11.5 billion for exiting coal

Duesseldorf (Reuters) – North Rhine-Westphalia, one of Germany’s coal-mining states, is demanding at least 10 billion euros ($11.5 billion) in structural support if coal-fired power stations are phased out, its economy minister said.

Germany is hammering out plans for how to abandon polluting coal stations in favor of renewables, which accounted for more than 40 percent of the energy mix last year, beating coal for the first time.

The German cabinet has appointed a coal commission to find a compromise on how operators of these assets and the regions they are located in could be compensated. The commission aims to wrap up its work on Feb. 1.

“For North Rhine-Westphalia, we expect a double-digit billion euro amount for structural change and infrastructure over the next decades,” North Rhine-Westphalia’s Economy Minister Andreas Pinkwart told journalists on Friday.

He said the exact sum could not be determined yet but added it would certainly be more than 10 billion euros. “Supported by Germany and the EU, the coal district can evolve into a model for how to safeguard energy and other resources.”

North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany’s most populous state, is home to some of the country’s largest energy groups, including RWE, Uniper and Steag, which all operate coal-fired power plants.

So far, Germany’s governing coalition has agreed to spend 1.5 billion euros to help regions affected by the planned exit from coal.

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: Armamenti, Devoluzione socialismo, Geopolitica Militare, Problemia Energetici, Unione Europea

Germania. Gigante dai piedi di argilla. Rapporto su catastrofe energetica.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-01-10.

Gigante dai Piedi di Argilla

Un governo serio dovrebbe quanto meno cercare di ridurre la possibilità di eventi catastrofici così come di aver predisposto piani adeguati nel caso accadessero.

Tuttavia un fatto emerge in modo chiaro: le attuali società industriali presentano un numero talmente elevato di severe vulnerabilità strutturali da poter essere totalmente paralizzate nel breve volgere di qualche decina di minuti. Usando fraseggi differenti, in caso di guerra sarebbe sciocco distruggere l’avversario: sarebbe sufficiente colpire una decina di punti strategici per renderlo inoffensivo.

Tranne pochissime nazioni, la quasi totalità dispone per il traffico telefonico di non più di una decina di concentratori, colpiti i quali l’intero sistema andrebbe fuori uso.

Similmente, la rete di distribuzione della corrente elettrica presenta punti strategicamente vulnerabili ma talmente importanti da bloccare tutto.

Per esempio, per lasciare tutta l’Italia senza corrente elettrica basterebbe colpire tre soli punti della connessione. Ossia, con tre razzetti da quattro soldi  l’Italia interna resterebbe senza corrente elettrica per almeno una settimana. Il rapporto prestazioni / costi è lampante. Sarebbe del tutto antieconomico bombardare Milano, Torino, Roma e città di tal livello.

* * * * * * *

La struttura della produzione energetica tedesca sembrerebbe essere stata progettata da un androide.

Pur essendo una nazione ricca di carbone, ha speso, e spende tuttora, quantità rilevanti di risorse nei metodi alternativi di generazione di corrente. A ciò consegue che i grandi parchi eolici sono messi ove vi sia vento a sufficienza, ossia nel nord del paese. Di qui la necessità di allestire elettrodotti di lunga percorrenza, lungo i quali la corrente è in buona parte dissipata.

Energia. Il problema degli elettrodotti a lunga distanza. Le dissipazioni.

Il sud ovest industrializzato è ricorso ad un escamotage. L’Austria importa di notte il surplus delle centrali atomiche dei paesi viciniori e usa questa energia per riempire i suoi bacini idrici, vendendo alla Baviera la mattina seguente energia idroelettrica, considerata così energia pulita. In altri termini, la Germania del sud dipende energeticamente dall’import.

*

L’alta dispersione lungo gli elettrodotti ha portato come conseguenza negli altri paesi alla costruzione di centrali elettriche relativamente poco potenti ma distribuite in modo equidistanziato, così da ridurre al massimo le dispersioni.

Non solo.

Un denso network di centrali elettriche è inoltre molto robusto nel sostenere guasti ai quali conseguirebbero blackout. Meno la distribuzione delle centrali è densa maggiori sono i rischi di blackout di grandi dimensioni. Ad una centrale elettriche andata improvvisamente in avaria, il sistema deve reagire riequilibrando la produzione, cosa che risulterebbe essere impossibile nei sistemi altamente concentrati.

*

La storia dei blackout dovrebbe aver insegnato qualcosa.

Il nove novembre 1965 un contatto nella centrale del Niagara Falls mandò in tilt tutta la centrale. Nel giro di soli dodici minuti primi il blackout si estese dapprima nello stato di New York, quindi nel Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire e due province canadesi: furono interessati oltre 200,000 kilometri quadrati densamente popolati.

Il 14 luglio 1977 un fulmine disattivò una centrale di trasformazione a New York, generando una reazione a catena di chiusure. La città restò al buio: la polizia arresto oltre quattromila persone che si stavano dedicando al saccheggio.

Il 28 settembre 2003 alle ore 3:01 un albero troppo vecchio per stare in piedi da solo crollò sulla linea ad altissima tensione Lavorgo-Mettlen, interrompendo l’importazione di energia dalla Svizzera all’Italia. Nel breve volgere di qualche minuto tutta l’Italia, Sicilia compresa, restò al buio. Treni ed ascensori fermi, ospedali senza corrente: il chaos generalizzato.

*

«According to an internal report by Germany’s civil protection agency, prolonged power shortages would disrupt the supply of vital goods in the country»

*

«The country lacks the necessary contigency plans for such an event»

*

«Prolonged, large-scale power shortages in Germany would cause a significant lack supplies, which could have “catastrophic” effects on the country»

*

«The alarm was raised by Germany’s Office for Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK) in an internal position paper»

* * * * * * * *

Cerchiamo di ragionare.

Un corto circuito banale a Niagara Falls ha indotto un blackout immane in quasi tutto il nordest americano. Un albero caduto su di un elettrodotto ha lasciato per due giorni l’Italia senza corrente.

Ma cosa mai succederebbe se i guasti fossero plurimi e simultanei?

Ma cosa mai potrebbe succedere se le interruzioni delle linee fossero artatamente indotte, mettiamo un sabotaggio ben organizzato?

E cosa mai potrebbe accadere in coso di un conflitto? Forse che i potenziali nemici non siano a conoscenza di questi colli di bottiglia? Sarebbero sufficienti sette cruise di piccola potenza per bloccare una intera nazione.


Deutsche Welle. 2018-11-27. Germany at risk of ‘catastrophic’ power shortages

According to an internal report by Germany’s civil protection agency, prolonged power shortages would disrupt the supply of vital goods in the country. The country lacks the necessary contigency plans for such an event.

*

Prolonged, large-scale power shortages in Germany would cause a significant lack supplies, which could have “catastrophic” effects on the country.

The alarm was raised by Germany’s Office for Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK) in an internal position paper, which was viewed by newspapers of the Funke Mediengruppe – a group that includes local newspapers across Germany.

In the research paper, the BBK reportedly wrote that a big power failure would result in a “significant distribution problem for important, sometimes vital goods” in almost all areas of society.

Electricity supply safe, but citizens and services unprepared

According to the report, this is also due to a lack of contingency plans for the distribution of fuel, food and medicines, particularly at the state and local level.

“Most of the gas stations wouldn’t provide any fuel. In a matter of hours, telephones and the internet could no longer be used. One would no longer be able to get a hold of any cash,” says the BBK’s paper.

Medical supplies could also only be provided for a short period of time, while critical infrastructure like the supply of energy, food and water, transport, telecommunications and finance would be affected.

But despite it ringing the alarm bell, the BBK believes such a catastrophic scenario in Germany isn’t imminent.

In fact, in its report the agency writes that the country’s electricity supply is “very safe,” and praised recent measures that improved IT security and increased the number of emergency power generators.

The BBK’s website advises that in case of a prolonged power shortage, citizens should wear warm clothes and light a fire with a supply of coal or wood to make up for the lack of heating.

It also advises to keep a stock of candles and flashlights, to prepare meals on a camping stove, and to have a sufficient reserve of cash in the house in case ATMs stop working due to the power failure.