Hacker News Reader

Comment by suddenlybananas | Hacker News Reader

if only they were ever so slightly less afraid of nuclear reactors.

Actually kWh price is around 30 cents [1], which is similar to e.g. California [2]. I think the problem is more likely to be a world-wide trough in demand (Germany famously relies mainly on exports), combined with the fact that wages have practically been stagnating for the past 20 years [3].

[1] https://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/energiemonitor-strompreis-gas...

[2] https://www.energysage.com/local-data/electricity-cost/ca/

[3] Sum all entries in the left column, you'll get 0: https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Arbeit/Verdienste/Realloeh...

> Actually kWh price is around 30 cents [1], which is similar to e.g. California

California isn't the world's factory - precisely because it has bad energy policy (if you want cheap energy - i.e. you're a factory).

The US economy is famously more than 65% domestic demand driven, and according to [1] California is the state with the most manufacturing in the entire US. So it is absolutely a huge factory.

[1] https://www.industryselect.com/blog/top-10-us-states-for-man...

> California stands as the center for manufacturing output in the United States with over 35,000 manufacturing firms and employing over 1.2 million Californians. Since California supplanted New York in 1965, our manufacturing firms have created new industries and supplied the world with manufactured goods spanning aerospace, computers and electronics, and, most recently, zero emission vehicles.

from [2] https://business.ca.gov/industries/manufacturing/

Manufacturing is ~10% of GDP in California: https://nam.org/state-manufacturing-data/2021-california-man...

California is only the largest manufacturer because it's BY FAR the largest state economy.

Manufacturing was ~20% of German GDP (down to 18.5%): https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/manufacturing-value-add...

If you keep having higher energy than the rest of Europe and the world - you'll keep shrinking your manufacturing as a percentage of GDP (and manufacturing jobs).

> If you keep having higher energy than the rest of Europe and the world - you'll keep shrinking your manufacturing as a percentage of GDP (and manufacturing jobs).

That's correct, but what you describe is an intentional continuation of the general trend of transitioning from secondary to tertiary sector, which has been on-going for several decades. Absent any major disasters or wars I suspect it will taper off at a level only slightly higher than California in percentage of GDP in the long term (40-60 years).

I am glad that we are afraid. The real costs (no subsidies, fuel, waste and dismantling fully paid by owner) of nuclear are just too high. Hinkley Point in the UK is a warning. Investments are far more effective in solar, wind and storage capabilities. Market prices reflect that very well already.

How many places are there with solar + wind providing the baseload capacity?

I'm all in favor of solar and wind power. But they need batteries to be useful around the clock. The batteries are $100 / kWh, and this number dwarfs the cost of solar installations proper.

Storage capacity has to be built along with solar and wind parks. Its already happening. But more investments are required ("more effective" than nuclear). And the electric grid must be decentralized further to accommodate decentralized storage (from your wall-box at home to industrial storage facilities). And it must not stop at borders.

Regenerative energy already surpassed all other means of energy production in 2024: https://www.bdew.de/media/documents/2024_12_18_Die_Energieve...

Battery prices are declining for some time now: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-12-10/electric-...

And even larger storage capabilities are built: https://standort-sachsen.de/de/aktuelles/news/detail/n1474-g...

(I am actually working for a grid operator)

No it doesn't and it isn't.

If you're working for a grid operator tell me how many TWh you need to sustain a 1-in-20 - A 1-in-goddamn-20 - dunkelflaute in a single large European nation, multiplied by cost of storage. Not the "decline", the absolute cost, and what percentage of GDP it would be. Compare and contrast to military expenditure at a time of near-war.

I also know these numbers.

Solar in Germany makes no sense. A third of the year the country is plunged into darkness. Ultra high voltage power lines and solar farms from Morocco which has pretty much perfect weather year round for solar would be a much better investment but then there is the question of national security risk like NS2

Are you arguing from your gut, or do you actually have some numbers? From all I read, wind and solar are significantly cheaper than nuclear power, with costs of solar expected to keep decreasing.

Yes, I have some numbers. Wholesale electricity costs since 2020 have repeatedly exceeded 700 - SEVEN HUNDRED - Euros per MWh (1). Because it was dark and still, a condition every single European in the last ten thousand years has known to exist. That's your number.

I won't ask you what impact you think that has on, say, steelmaking, because I've lived it. I've picked the tenders and the Euro steel was not competitive with Chinese steel if it was free, due to uncertainty in delivery date.

China spent approx 2x Hinkley Point on nuclear. It has 30 GW of capacity in return. That works in winter. I would do nasty things to get that for my country.

(1) Naturally, French nuclear is literally not allowed to access this price, and must sell at 45. Because FREE MARKET.

I don't see how your numbers (for which a source and some additional context would be appreciated) support your original point ("solar in Germany makes no sense").

As an actual counterpoint, please consider this recent study by Fraunhofer ISE [1], which provides average generation costs for various types of power plants. Even with current battery prices, large scale PV plants supported by battery systems are significantly cheaper than coal, gas and nuclear plants -- and this advantage is expected to increase with falling prices of both battery storage and PV systems.

[1] https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/press-media/press-releases/...

There is a gigantic difference in solar irradiation between winter and summer

https://weatherspark.com/d/148124/12/22/Average-Weather-on-D...

On the other hand we could have much higher numbers of wind powered electricity if folks didn't spent their time doing lawsuits to prevent them being built.

Nuclear power is great for clean, safe electricity generation. But it can't really substitute for natural gas as an industrial feedstock and heat source, which is why much of the German chemicals industry is moving to places like Ohio.

I'm afraid that even if the construction were expedited to the highest possible degree, a new nuclear power plant would take 5-6 years to go online.

If only they had been ever so slightly more friendly towards nuclear reactors, not the France or Korea level, of course, but still. And maybe trusted Mr Putin a tad less. 2022 was a wake-up moment, but 2014 and even 2008 were rather clearly audible signals. Alas...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com