Gas prices - Where is gas still affordable?

Hello Deliverer
I’ll do it step by step:
Fossil fuels are so expensive because the government has raised taxes and levies to an exorbitant level.
One liter of gasoline costs almost exactly 1 euro without taxes and levies (the raw material costs, profit margin, transport costs, etc. are all included). The rest is imposed by the government.
Electricity costs significantly more because the subsidies for renewable energies are financed by it. And of course, taxes and levies.
Steven

Rarely have I read such total nonsense. Electricity is (among other reasons) so expensive because we have heavily subsidized nuclear energy for about 60 years, and for a long time, no consensus was reached on phasing out German coal mining. The few cents the Renewable Energy Act (by the way, currently, wait, how much is it again? Ah, it is now 0 cents (zero!). However, unfortunately, we have recently taken on state guarantees for the proper disposal of nuclear waste. I only say: incalculable risk.
Of course, the government taxes gasoline. Unfortunately, for about 30 years now, these revenues have not been earmarked for infrastructure development of roads and bridges.
The Greens are the only ones who showed a way out of this misery decades ago, but we have / had it too good.
The blacks, browns, blues, yellows, and also the Social Democrats have completely messed it up.
Not that the Greens do EVERYTHING right, realpolitik isn’t a walk in the park.
I would have more to say on the subject, but right now it really pisses me off that such intellectual rubbish has been spread here for a long time without comment, so I have to go to sleep.
P.S. I’m lying here in the hospital with a Corona extreme opponent conspiracy theorist Bill Gates system controller thinker, and he bombarded me so much today that my head is buzzing. So don’t take anything personally, everyone can of course express their opinion, I just managed to do the same.

[QUOTE="Marvinius, post: 584805, member: 31895"]The fact is, we are now indulging in two power generation systems: the non-baseload-capable and only very limitedly storable "renewables" and the fossil reserve capacities. Since in winter the renewables can sometimes deliver 0.0 kWh over several days/weeks, the fossil reserve capacity must cover 100% of the electricity demand. This already has the unavoidable consequence that electricity here will always be at least twice as expensive as in a country that only has a single, but baseload-capable power generation system. And if you then think "from the end," the renewables are actually just expensive and completely unnecessary for the paying consumer, but a real goldmine for the subsidy recipients (!!!Renewable Energy Act surcharge!!!, which after abolition is now just less conspicuously financed from tax funds_O).

The fossil reserve capacity must be very quickly controllable with a high share of strongly fluctuating power generation from the "renewables." Gas power plants fulfill this requirement very well, coal power plants less so, and nuclear power plants not really at all. This is—besides ideological blindness—the main reason why the Greens are so vehemently against extending the operation of the last 3 nuclear power plants, as it would greatly underscore the redundancy of the "renewables."

Actually, the "GERMAN ENERGY TRANSITION" has driven into a wall with the supply problems regarding gas, but here it just takes a little longer for everyone to understand that. :)

There are now sufficient technical possibilities for regenerative full supply (yes, 100%) to solve the base and peak load problems. It would just have to be really politically wanted and enforced against the (corroded) Legislature imposed by lobbyists. Time is just getting a bit tight right now thanks to idiots, doubters, and blockers :rolleyes:

Hello SumsumBiene

is there going to be an argument?

Steven

No. If I had deemed it necessary, my choice of words would have been different. Besides, it gives me the impression that you are someone who likes to have the last word, and before any absurd theories arise here, I will leave it at that. Reasonable discussions don’t happen on the internet anyway....

There are now sufficient technical possibilities in regenerative full supply (yes, 100%) to solve the base and peak load problems. It would only need to be politically wanted for real and enforced against the legislature controlled by lobbyists (corroded). Time is just getting a bit tight thanks to the jerks, doubters, and blockers :rolleyes:

Xi and Vladimir are happy about the "believers" who keep their cash registers ringing...

Xi and Vladimir are happy about the "believers" who make the cash register ring for them...

more crap again. In the current situation, we (Germany) are of course trying in the short term to generate enough energy by any means necessary. Coal, gas, wind, water, sun, etc. Significant cuts will occur in my opinion nonetheless; I give us a 50:50 chance that NS1 will be reopened. Tragic (or tragicomic?) that our rather Russia-friendly policy of recent decades is now coming back to bite us (vomits at our feet) But: medium to long term (would have, could have... then we would have already arrived there) we must and will rely on energy suppliers that are dirt cheap for end consumers, environmentally friendly, and climate neutral. Anyone who does not see this so ;) crystal clear ;) path is short-sighted, stupid, or blinded. And I am neither "believing" (rather agnostic) nor a particular Russia-basher, but simply technically scientifically interested and trust the prevailing scientific opinion on this topic. Of course, I do not hide my red/green heart either, but I am of clear mind (sane!) which one may well doubt about some others here (feel addressed if you want) But despite everything, of course, my crystal ball is no more accurate than others...

Photovoltaics on the roof also make no sense at the moment, as it cannot support them and will need to be re-roofed in the medium term

The sensible approach would be: remove the tiles, insulate, put metal roofing on. That is more durable, cheaper, currently available, and best of all: it is so light that including full-area photovoltaics the roof is lighter than before. Oh yes, the installation of photovoltaics is also cheaper on metal roofing.

then a heat pump also makes no sense.

There are rarely photovoltaic-heat pump combos where photovoltaics can supply more than 15-20% of the heating electricity. So that is not decisive in a crisis—the systems have to be considered separately. You install a heat pump because you want to have warmth; you install photovoltaics because you want to produce green electricity.

I’m massively retrofitting fireplaces this winter

In my opinion, that is the wrong approach.

[*]It is no longer easy to get new wood stoves approved.
[*]Ecologically it would also be bad: produces more CO2 than burning gas. (No, in Germany nothing has regrown for years)
[*]You also bring fine dust and stench into the neighborhood. In the morning during winter you can hardly cycle through the village...
[*]Then there are hardly any left. If so, at exorbitant prices.
[*]The same goes for firewood. You already need connections if you want to get dried wood before winter.

In my opinion, it would be better to retrofit one or two air-to-air heat pumps (aka split air conditioning units). This would have the following advantages:

[*]The "fuel" is more available and relatively cheap.
[*]Ecologically it would be the only sensible option.
[*]During transitional periods the gas heating remains off completely; during the deep winter its power can be massively reduced.
[*]They also run at night, which with a wood stove is rather inconvenient.
[*]They cool the house inexpensively in summer – with a cool head you can plan much better how to make your house fit for the future.