From Dr. Benny Peiser and The GWPF
Merkel’s Green Shift Backfires As German CO2 Emissions Jump – solar business closing
Siemens, Europe’s largest engineering company, has lost patience with its CEO after Peter Loescher’s expansion into green energy and expensive acquisitions led to a fifth profit-forecast cut. Supervisory board officials have asked for the 55-year-old Austrian native to be ousted. A key element of Loescher’s growth strategy was the 2009 announcement that he would transform Siemens into a “green infrastructure giant”, heralding a drive into solar technology to promote Siemens as a partner for companies and governments keen to use more renewable energies. At the 2010 annual general meeting, he wore a green tie and called for a “green revolution.” Since Loescher took over in July 2007, the shares have declined 22 percent. –Alex Webb, Bloomberg, 29 July 2013
German engineering giant Siemens has confirmed it is completely winding down its solar business. The involvement ended in a disaster, costing Siemens about one billion euros. Plans to sell off its solar business had come to nothing, Siemens admitted Monday in confirming a report in the German newspaper “Handelsblatt”. The involvement ended in a disaster, costing Siemens about one billion euros ($1.3 billion). —Deutsche Welle, 17 June 2013
Germany’s exit from nuclear power could cost the country as much as 1.7 trillion euros ($2.15 trillion) by 2030, or two thirds of the country’s GDP in 2011, according to Siemens, which built all of Germany’s 17 nuclear plants. “This will either be paid by energy customers or taxpayers,” Siemens board member Michael Suess, in charge of the company’s Energy Sector, told Reuters. “As an industry, Germany has always reached its goals. Now the whole world is looking at us. If the energy shift should fail … it would undermine Germany’s credibility as an industry nation,” Suess said. –Christoph Steitz, Reuters, 17 January 2012
Germany’s rise in CO2 emissions is set to worsen for a second year, the first back-to-back increase since at least the 1980s, after Chancellor Angela Merkel’s decision to shut nuclear plants led utilities to burn more coal. Utilities boosted hard coal imports 25 percent in the first quarter to 10 million metric tons. With elections due in September, the move is a blow to Merkel, a former environment minister who helped negotiate the 1997 Kyoto accord curbing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. “The trend of rising German CO2 emissions is alarming,” said Claudia Kemfert, who heads the energy unit at the Berlin-based DIW. “Climate change has quite frankly slipped to the back burner of policy priorities,” IEA Executive Director Maria van der Hoeven said on June 10. –Stefan Nicola, Bloomberg, 29 July 2013
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Trillion dollar cocaine decisions. Repent at your leisure.
Go thorium. Seriously crazy not to.
Siemens needs to reconcentrate its efforts on nuclear power, which will become the new “in” thing once the horrendous costs of the green failures become known to the public.
Does anyone know if solar panels are available at fire-sale prices?
By 2030 Germany would be incapable of building any new nuclear power plants even if they want to since all their knowledgeable people will have retired and they will not be training any young people to take over. Extreme environmentalism is taking Germany 2 steps to back coal technology and 3 steps back in nuclear capability.
Forward to the past.
neil says: July 29, 2013 at 8:53 am “Go thorium. Seriously crazy not to.” Their complete argument for thorium in six words.
Seems anti humanist ideologies do no sell well in the real world.
My bet is that our govts will buy up the firesale solar panels and destroy them, rather than allow taxpayers to enjoy a slight benefit from the collapse of this religious stupidity.
As part of this too big to fail credos, which only applies to major campaign contributors.
Funny what a trend setter, industry leader, Enron turned out to be.
CANDU reactors can already exploit the thorium fuel cycle without significant changes.
Interesting that Loescher means “extinguisher” in German…did Siemens expect him to extinguish the supposed heat/fires of CAGW? All he appears to have done is extinguish the profits and
near-term potential of one of Germany’s best technical companies…..sad…hope that Bosch
isn’t roped in with this as well…
Golden says:
July 29, 2013 at 9:24 am
“By 2030 Germany would be incapable of building any new nuclear power plants even if they want to since all their knowledgeable people will have retired and they will not be training any young people to take over. Extreme environmentalism is taking Germany 2 steps to back coal technology and 3 steps back in nuclear capability.”
The technology is actually simpler than a modern coal plant. Less pressure, less temperature; at least in our old GE Mark 1 type reactors – I think half of the German reactors are of that design. You don’t run them as pressurized because higher pressure makes the consequences of a leak more severe.
The real trick is enriching the Uranium; and nothing beats a German gas centrifuge.
What an absolute debacle it was to shut down those nuclear power stations.
And that’s what happens when you get politicians who like to head whichever way the wind blows.
The cost of producing electricity from coal in EU (September 2012) is about 32 US$ / MWh
From gas (Siemens) it is about 74.
From offshore wind (Siemens) it is about 181.
CEO Loescher recently stated offshore wind cost will be lowered by 40% in 2020.
(about the same as new nuclear)
You can compare this to information from US EIA of January 2013.
One bad CEO down, one Merkel to go.
Once the rolling blackouts start, people will start to realize that there’s more to electrical generation than wishful thinking about windmills and solar panels.
markx says:
July 29, 2013 at 10:23 am
“What an absolute debacle it was to shut down those nuclear power stations.
And that’s what happens when you get politicians who like to head whichever way the wind blows.”
The real problem is not the loss of the nukes but the loss of any rational debate. The state media does nothing to inform the public but has a Greenpeace “expert” on every talk show. I am sure Greenpeace is a cohort of the EU commission; who else could abseil from a parliamentary building in a security perimeter during meetings of heads of states without getting shot.
Why the EU commission continues the green shocktroop tactics I don’t know. It might be infathomable incompetence.
Scott Basinger says:
July 29, 2013 at 10:38 am
“One bad CEO down, one Merkel to go.
Once the rolling blackouts start, people will start to realize that there’s more to electrical generation than wishful thinking about windmills and solar panels.”
We’re constantly expanding our brown coal capacities. Producing plant food CO2 while preaching CO2AGW. Stupidity? Evil brilliant masterplan? Can’t tell.
OIC. Merkel says she’s watching the trend worried; can’t be that the market prefers coal over gas etc. So her plan is to act decisively and – guess what – increase the price of CO2 certificates; there; problem fixed; green shocktroop goons play happy; planet saved; and ka-ching.
Getting the hang of it.
Aren’t they one of the firms at the CA HSR trough?
Like I keep saying – purge the greenies and the left from any position in which they can influence policy. With the harm they’ve already done, why show them any mercy?
I read a Reuter’s clip on this back on June 17th (same fateful day as the note about Germany getting out of nuclear): http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE95G0CW20130617?irpc=935. Facts cited were the same. Like US manufacturers, they probably cannot compete with the Chinese who have cheap labor working long hours, much of the global rare earth ore mining capacity currently in operation (rare earths are used in many things associated with “green energy,” including regenerative braking systems and wind turbines, and solar panels), few to no environmental and safety regulations, and did I mention long hours and cheap wages?
I suspect that Merkel may be playing the politician with all the green energy crap, regardless of how she may feel personally. After all, she too has a constituency that has been drinking the environmentalist Kool Aid for a long time, and is terribly sensitive to all things “green.”
A lot of infrastructure outfits (and utility and other investors) have been chasing the “green energy” bubble, and why shouldn’t they? What’s not to love? Special accelerated depreciation provisions, special tax write offs, on-going revenue for selling energy promises to traditional utilities that are mandated to provide some amount of “renewable” in the portfolio.
Dear DIY magazine,
Plywood is getting very expensive. Solar panels are waterproof and supposed to exist for 25 years. There is a sale on at Siemens. Is it cheaper to build my new shed from solar panels? Can I run my beer fridge from them as long as I only want a coldy at 5 pm?
regards, Fred Shed
Well in a way, that really is a shame. Siemens to me has always represented a truly class act. I believe I used my first Siemens electronic components somewhere in the 1948 time frame. They were either Selenium, or Copper Oxide semiconductor diode bridge rectifiers. Packaged in a very well designed flat metal package. Worked great.
The huge alternators at the Grand Coulee Dam, in Washington State are made by Siemens. Around 1980, I was involved in a Siemens buyout of a once successful, but then bankrupt LED company, helping transfer that company’s technology to Siemens. That got me my sole trip to Europe, to visit Siemens R&D Labs, in Munich, Regensburg, and Erlangen. The Regensburg site, I believe was once a Messerschmitt factory.
They were a very professional outfit in those days (still are I’m sure), but getting caught up in a purely political exercise , was perhaps a big misteak..
Well, throw the rascals out, and get back on track..
I wonder if/when GE’s Immelt is going to go?
Spiegel international (Eng.) topic: German Energy Revolution (revolution not so much)
http://www.spiegel.de/international/topic/german_energy_revolution/
But his and the German intentions were good. So that must count for something