The energy transition law or the cart before the horse.

Innovations, ideas or patents for sustainable development. Decrease in energy consumption, reduction of pollution, improvement of yields or processes ... Myths or reality about inventions of the past or the future: the inventions of Tesla, Newman, Perendev, Galey, Bearden, cold fusion ...
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

The energy transition law or the cart before the horse.




by izentrop » 20/04/18, 23:15

Wind and solar installations are going well with the carrot of subsidies at the end. In my region, it is mainly wind power that is on the rise.
Image
Combined wind and solar production can vary greatly within a few hours,
depending on the weather.
To compensate for the wind and solar production dips, the simplest strategy consists in installing gas power stations that can quickly take over when wind and sun are not there. https://www.echosciences-hauts-de-franc ... ouvelables
Do you really think that was the goal?

We preferred to break the nuclear system that worked well than to think long term and wait for the storage resources to be effective before launching this operation.
Walking on the head and putting the cart before the horse is definitely the policy of our leaders. : Cry: : Evil:
0 x
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: The Energy Transition Law or the cart before the horse.




by sen-no-sen » 20/04/18, 23:43

Indeed it is somewhat paradoxical to emit more CO2 (via gas relay stations) to "save the climate". : Lol:
The energy transition law was decided with a cookie cutter, in particular because of the trauma induced by the Fukushima disaster.
The idea of ​​reducing the share of nuclear energy in electricity production from 75 to 50% was chosen simply because 50% is more psychically acceptable.
In the idea of ​​the government the goal is to induce the notion that 50% is half and therefore that it is not much ... We are therefore faced with a communication matter rather than a solution thoughtful technique.
Now does it make sense to cut electro-nuclear production on the eve of the oil depletion? : roll:

The other problem is the astronomical cost of the energy transition, almost 8 times that of the renewal of the nuclear fleet that will have to be assumed in a period of almost zero growth ...
Faced with such a cost, we are therefore probably moving towards an unsupported nuclear / renewable mix and discourse “one step forward two steps back” based on opinions rather than solid analyzes.
Strangely, no serious plan to optimize rail-based travel seems to interest the governments, which are continuing to undermine the railway sector, so we are once again dealing with a team of ultra-liberal accountants rather than scientists.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Bardal
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 509
Registration: 01/07/16, 10:41
Location: 56 and 45
x 198

Re: The Energy Transition Law or the cart before the horse.




by Bardal » 21/04/18, 05:43

Come on ... A few small calculations of this ecological, financial and human mismanagement ... Which moreover did not start with this government, actually made up of "a team of ultra-liberal accountants rather than scientists" ...

On the background: https://www.ccomptes.fr/sites/default/f ... lables.pdf (this is not Luronne literature, but it is instructive).

A small digest (S. Huet, le Monde), with a more direct translation: http://huet.blog.lemonde.fr/

Where it is shown that there is no need "to have been to schools until late" to be a minister ...

We are very little ...
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: The Energy Transition Law or the cart before the horse.




by Janic » 21/04/18, 09:01

Do you really think that was the goal?

We preferred to break the nuclear system that worked well than to think long term and wait for the storage resources to be effective before launching this operation.
Walking on the head and putting the cart before the horse is definitely the policy of our leaders.
It has been over half a century since the question was asked and to which the leaders of the time avoided answering. It's not when the fire wreaks havoc that you have to go buy a fire extinguisher. Instead of developing nuclear power plants that encourage wastage of electricity (such as campaigns for full electric heating) and which still continues, it is towards energy savings that the choice should have been made.
In addition, the idea of ​​storage (hydroelectric dam style) is also one of the bad choices and corresponds to this same idea of ​​possible future waste when this impossibility of storage is precisely a limiting factor.

The other problem is the astronomical cost of the energy transition, almost 8 times that of the renewal of the nuclear fleet that will have to be assumed in a period of almost zero growth ...
Same thing! This renewal is supposed to be based on this same waste. We want to compare the costly switch from one mode to another, ignoring the much higher cost of the inevitable dismantling of end-of-life plants (something we don't really know how to do) and the cost of maintaining nuclear waste for thousands of years, a poisoned gift to future generations. : Evil:
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
Bardal
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 509
Registration: 01/07/16, 10:41
Location: 56 and 45
x 198

Re: The Energy Transition Law or the cart before the horse.




by Bardal » 21/04/18, 09:51

Of course, waste ... and energy savings ...

But the historical truth consists in recalling that the "all electric" houses were the first to be insulated and consumed about half as much as the other houses of the time, heated with fuel or gas ... Incidentally, all countries developed (Germany first) have a per capita electricity consumption roughly identical to that of the French, with nuclear or not ...

Must we also remember that in France, energy is first and foremost hydrocarbons (2/3 of the energy consumed), hydrocarbons from which we must get out as quickly as possible ... Those who speak of a foreseeable drop in electricity have a totally narrow vision of the problem, blinded that they are obsessed with leaving nuclear power; it's perfectly irresponsible. In this context, and especially if we continue to develop intermittent fatal energies, storage means not only will not be a luxury, but without them we are going towards a complete shortage.

Indeed there would be a "limiting factor", but that will mean essential a situation of dramatic shortage, which I dare not even consider, except if you show us the example by depriving yourself of all heating and all comfort, as well as of any movement other than the strength of your muscles ...
0 x
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: The Energy Transition Law or the cart before the horse.




by sen-no-sen » 21/04/18, 10:38

Janic wrote: Same thing! This renewal is supposed to be based on this same waste. We want to compare the costly switch from one mode to another, ignoring the much higher cost of the inevitable dismantling of end-of-life plants (something we don't really know how to do) and the cost of maintaining nuclear waste for thousands of years, a poisoned gift to future generations. : Evil:


According to Greenpeace via an audit carried out by a specialized office, the cost of dismantling the French nuclear fleet would amount to around 150 billion euros, or double that provided by EDF (75 billion) ... which does not to provision only 36 for the moment!
This cost is quite realistic if you take into account the many nuggets that could arise.
The renewal of the new nuclear fleet would be estimated at around 300 billion euros against roughly 2000 or even 3000 billion (X10) for a 100% renewable replacement ...and there is no question here of such a sum to cover all our energy needs, but only the replacement of the electricity production fleet!
As mentioned above all this will have to be done in a period of zero growth (stagflation), I wonder who will pay? : roll:

We must not lie, renewable energy will not be able to cover all of our energy needs in a society like ours, and if RES can only produce the electricity necessary to propel the future car fleet, this will already be a great feat.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: The Energy Transition Law or the cart before the horse.




by izentrop » 21/04/18, 11:00

The industrialists have also rushed to the smart grids and also, a big mess with an ill-defined product, the sabotaged transition and above all, injured consumers.
If there is a Linky revolution, there is a good chance that it is most often done in the mode of transparency for the consumer.

In any case, and even if we have to wait a lot for behavioral changes towards greater energy efficiency, the optimized technical management of supply and demand balances in the new electrical systems will remain one of the key conditions. a successful energy transition. https://theconversation.com/compteur-el ... ique-59769
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: The Energy Transition Law or the cart before the horse.




by Janic » 21/04/18, 13:30

The renewal of the new nuclear fleet would be estimated at around 300 billion euros against about 2000 or even 3000 billion (X10) for a 100% renewable replacement ... and there is no question here of 'such a sum to cover all our energy needs, but only the replacement of the electricity production fleet!
to which must be added the deconstruction of old women whose real cost is unknown to us. In addition, renewable energies are still in their infancy, without counting the multiple oppositions of individuals or municipalities (justified or not).
As mentioned above all this will have to be done in a period of zero growth (stagflation), I wonder who will pay?

This is a bad calculation because it implies a current maintenance of consumption, even more with the absurdity of electric cars with high power and autonomy, when they should have been reserved for cities to reduce air pollution .
Then, it was necessary to anticipate the progressive abandonment of nuclear power (whose theoretical aim is no longer to produce bombs) instead of multiplying the number, which no other country has done. Similarly, nuclear waste could only increase in proportion without anyone knowing how to reduce or eliminate its dangerousness ... and that it will also have to be paid for millennia. (If there is no French Chernobyl!)
Finally, stagflation only exists when investments are no longer made in economically reducing sectors of it. See the concrete example of Portugal.

We must not lie, renewable energy will not be able to cover all of our energy needs in a society like ours, and if RES can only produce the electricity necessary to propel the future car fleet, this will already be a great feat.

Only for a wasteful society like ours, indeed. Hence the need to change consumption patterns (to be compared to food consumption or drugs and vaccines that border on consumer madness!)
For the electric fleet it is obviously an absurdity to want to replace a blind with a blind! : Cry:
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: The Energy Transition Law or the cart before the horse.




by sen-no-sen » 21/04/18, 14:33

Janic wrote: to which must be added the deconstruction of old women whose real cost is unknown to us. In addition, renewable energies are still in their infancy, without counting the multiple oppositions of individuals or municipalities (justified or not).


As mentioned above, the dismantling of the current nuclear fleet should amount to around 150 billion euros, it is a high range which takes into account any unforeseen events.

This is a bad calculation because it implies a current maintenance of consumption, even more with the absurdity of electric cars with high power and autonomy, when they should have been reserved for cities to reduce air pollution .


As I mentioned the 3000 billion euros only concerns the consumption of domestic and industrial electricity, it does not take into account the replacement of fossil fuels by electricity to propel automobiles.
That is to say that even by greatly reducing our energy consumption *, investments will still have to reach such an order of magnitude.

Hence the need to change consumption patterns (to be compared to food consumption or drugs and vaccines that border on consumer madness!)


We agree, but who will make the decision and who will have the power to reverse this trend? : Arrow: Person...
It is the crisis phase that we are going through that will set the record straight, not political decisions.


* By reducing for example by 3/4 the number of vehicles in circulation ...
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: The Energy Transition Law or the cart before the horse.




by Janic » 21/04/18, 16:29

As mentioned above, the dismantling of the current nuclear fleet should amount to around 150 billion euros, it is a high range which takes into account any unforeseen events.

It is not only a question of dismantling structures that are only slightly irradiated, but hearts as well, which does not seem to have been achieved yet and can cost crazy amounts except to bury them as for the dumping of our consumer waste.
This is a bad calculation because it implies a current maintenance of consumption, even more with the absurdity of electric cars with high power and autonomy, when they should have been reserved for cities to reduce air pollution .

As I mentioned the 3000 billion euros only concerns the consumption of domestic and industrial electricity,

Where does this figure come from that I haven't found anywhere?
it does not take into account the replacement of fossil fuels by electricity to propel automobiles.

That is to say that even by greatly reducing our energy consumption *, investments will still have to reach such an order of magnitude.

When you wait for the house to burn completely it costs more than putting fire alarms and fire extinguishers. Unfortunately, for 50 years we have let the house burn. But continuing to live in the middle of a burnt building is not the solution either and rebuilding, it actually costs a lot, except to become homeless!
https://www.greenpeace.fr/dechets-nucle ... dioactifs/
Hence the need to change consumption patterns (to be compared to food consumption or drugs and vaccines that border on consumer madness!)
We agree, but who will make the decision and who will have the power to reverse this trend? Person...
It is the crisis phase that we are going through that will set the record straight, not political decisions.

Proof that if!
https://www.euractiv.fr/section/energie ... -isolated/

Indeed, it is the popular pressure that will change things, especially if a French power plant explodes or leaking enough to set the record straight.
For now, the fears instilled by the authorities and the media have focused on global warming and the influence of the consumption of fossil fuels, like a tree hiding the forest from the risks of nuclear, invisible, without colors, nor smells.

But the historical truth consists in recalling that the "all electric" houses were the first to be insulated and consumed about half as much as the other houses of the time, heated with fuel or gas ... Incidentally, all countries developed (Germany first) have a per capita electricity consumption roughly identical to that of the French, with nuclear or not ...
It's just! except that it was to compete with the cost of heating by fossil fuels, but at a much higher cost by its insulation. The same insulation would have drastically reduced the bill with fossil fuels, as is the case with so-called passive over-insulated houses, reducing the cost of necessary heating to almost nothing.
It does not therefore credit the nuclear as a better solution.
Indeed there would be a "limiting factor", but that will mean essential a situation of dramatic shortage, which I dare not even consider, except if you show us the example by depriving yourself of all heating and all comfort, as well as of any movement other than the strength of your muscles ...
she is good this one, but a little and even a lot worn ... knees : Cheesy: the linking factor is also valid for the materials extracted from the soil and therefore we have no national source and the tap can also close, maybe even before the fossil energies. But nobody talks about a sudden cessation, because almost impossible, including the dismantling of the power stations in question. But many savings can be made by ceasing many wastes to start with the eve of electrical appliances, the decrease of domestic appliances like household robots without much use like electric boxes and other mixers like a whole host of others products and that does not bring us back to the Neanderthal! The state has encouraged the use of lighting economizer, decreased unnecessary public lighting in the middle of the night, etc ...
The example of Remondo (even if everyone can not or will not do it) shows the possibility and more and more eco-friendly means develop individually: small streams always end up filling the sea!
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Go back to "Innovations, inventions, patents and ideas for sustainable development"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : Bing [Bot] and 136 guests