Geoff Russell just posted at the “Brave New Climate” site about the wondrous advantages of nuclear energy and the complete failure of solar and wind energy to get anything done in Germany (link omitted on purpose). Thanks to this tweet by Rod Adams for the link.
Here are a couple of gems, all in one paragraph, from that rather long post:
In contrast, it’s been 12 years since the Germans introduced a feed in tariff to reward rich Germans for electricity generated by putting solar panels on their roofs. We copied them. During this period the German Government has incurred a 100 billion Euro debt to be paid over the next 20 years to those same rich Germans for a miserable 19 terawatt hours per year of day-time only electricity (about 3.3 percent of its total).
Might there be any factual error in that paragraph, I wonder?
The feed-in tariff was introduced in March 2000, which is thirteen years ago right now.
The four goals of the Law on Priority for Renewable Energy are stated in its Article 1, none of them being “rewarding rich Germans”. For the record, these are (1) enabling a sustainable energy supply, especially in the interest of protecting the climate, (2) lowering the cost of energy, also by including long term external effects, (3) leave more fossil fuel reserves for future generations, and (4) contribute to the development of renewable electricity technology.
The German government has incurred exactly zero Euro debt. That fact is obvious to anyone who has clue one on how a feed-in tariff works (which seems not to include this author).
So, yes, as expected for something published at the anti-renewable propaganda site “Brave New Climate”, this article is full of errors when talking about Germany.
And this is another great example to point to for my impression that many pro-nuclear voices want an all-out war with the renewable camp, which of course completely ruins the climate argument for nuclear and only leads to generate even more opposition than this hopeless climate policy option has in the first place.