Germany’s Windexit…Old Wind Turbines Dismantled Without Replacement…Looming “Massive Power Outage”?

Reposted from The NoTricksZone

By P Gosselin on 7. April 2021Share this…

Looming “massive power outage”?

Another signal that the German Energiewende (transition to green energies) is not working out are actions and comments recently coming from the German Ministry of Food and Agriculture, as reported 2 days ago in a newspaper: (Hat-tip: Misaki – im Widerstand)

“Emergency plan for the food supply. Berlin. The Federal Government and the states have agreed on an emergency plan for securing the food supply, according to information from Federal agriculture Minister Julai Klöckner (CDU). as an example for a supply crisis she named a ‘massive power outage”, she told in an interview with this newspaper.”

Germans scale back on wind energy

The German government loves to talk about the importance of green energies, but when it comes to their expansion, it is in fact doing the opposite: Old wind turbines are being removed without being replaced by new generation turbines.

Perhaps it’s beginning dawn on the German government that especially wind and solar energy just aren’t working out, and so they have massively scaled back subsidies with the aim of scaling them back.

More and more old wind turbines coming off the grid

At the European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) Andreas Demmig writes about a recent report on wind energy appearing on NDR German public television: “New energy act: More and more wind turbines going off the grid”.

NDR featured the dismantling of three wind turbines in Altenstedt (Lower Saxony) after having been in operation for 20 years. “They are no longer profitable to operate” after the expiry of the 2o years of guaranteed feed-in tariffs to their operators.

No longer economical without the subsidy

The three wind turbines together generated 2 million kWh of electricity annually, meaning 666,666 kWh/ turbine per year. But now that the subsidies have ended, owner Horst Mengels explains he can no longer operate the turbines economically at electricity market prices of less than three, sometimes even one cent. Menawhile private consumers of electricity now have to pay 30 cents and more for a kWh. Repair and maintenance of the turbines are no longer possible at the low market prices.

“Gravedigger of the Energiewende”

Mr Mengels has built 99 wind turbines, the last one in 2020. Last year he hoped for a satisfactory decision from politicians on how to proceed with the old turbines, but in disappointment: “Politics is completely despondent, hesitant and dithering. Economics Minister Altmeier is the gravedigger of the energy transition.”

Scalebacks as electricity demand rises

For the proponents of green energies, Germany’s retreat is baffling in the least. Veronika Grimm, Energy Transition Commission of the Federal Government is convinced that, contrary to the opinion of the Federal Government, electricity consumption is not declining. It estimates that in this decade electricity demand will increase by up to 30% – through electromobility, heating with electricity and heat pumps, the hydrogen strategy.

More coming offline than what is being added

Last year, only 200 new wind turbines were built. At the current rate, more turbine capacity will be coming offline than what is being added.

Prof. Volker Quaschning, expert on green energies, says that the dismantling of wind (and PV) plants, spurred on by the expiry of subsidies, sets back the energy turnaround by years. “If you look back, 20 years ago more was built than what we see today. There is a danger that at some point we will end up with zero new construction, or even a net reduction. – Then we won’t need to talk about climate protection in Germany any more.”

16 GW coming offline

The NDR reports that in the coming years, 16 GW of wind power will be removed from the subsidy system. Almost two-thirds of this may not be replaced by new, more powerful ones.

As far as Altenstedt goes, where the three featured turbines are being dismantled, the NDR reports: “No more wind turbines may be built in Altenstedt, there are no more planning permits. The energy transition is now history here.

The remaining infrastructure: transmission lines, access roads, transformers etc. are available and are now no longer being used. In Altenstedt they will probably become the first relics of a past idea that went sour.

NDR summarizes: “The consumer has paid around 30 billion euros a year in feed-in tariffs. […] a lot of money for an instrument that fails to deliver”.

4.8 62 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
April 8, 2021 10:18 pm

As an engineer might comment, they appeared to be the perfect solution for a problem that didn’t exist, but requiring taxpayer and consumer subsidies without which (see billionaire Warren Buffett’s explanation) nobody would be bothered investing in them.

And all considered it is amazing that once free market capitalism based wealthy nations were prepared to risk economic vandalism for a climate hoax creatively accounted warming trend deception.

Yes the weather and therefore the climate change, naturally.

Reply to  Dennis
April 9, 2021 2:03 am

I’m shocked, shocked I tell you – at Germany’s energy shortfall. How did this happen? Who could have foreseen this terrible, costly, green energy debacle?

Oh yes, we did, two decades ago, and we published our findings back in 2002!

This is what happens when a country is governed by scoundrels and imbeciles.

Regards, Allan MacRae, B.A.Sc., M.Eng.

In 2002, co-authors Dr Sallie Baliunas, Astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian, Dr Tim Patterson, Paleoclimatologist, Carleton U, Ottawa and Allan MacRae, P.Eng. (now retired), McGill, Queens, U of Alberta, wrote:

1. “Climate science does not support the theory of catastrophic human-made global warming – the alleged warming crisis does not exist.”

2. “The ultimate agenda of pro-Kyoto advocates is to eliminate fossil fuels, but this would result in a catastrophic shortfall in global energy supply – the wasteful, inefficient energy solutions proposed by Kyoto advocates simply cannot replace fossil fuels.”

Published by APEGA in the PEGG, reprinted by other professional journals, The Globe and Mail and La Presse,
by Sallie Baliunas, Tim Patterson and Allan MacRae, November 2002

The ability to predict is the best objective measure of scientific and technical competence.

Climate doomsters have a perfect NEGATIVE predictive track record – every very-scary climate prediction, of the ~80 they have made since 1970, has FAILED TO HAPPEN.
“Rode and Fischbeck, professor of Social & Decision Sciences and Engineering & Public Policy, collected 79 predictions of climate-caused apocalypse going back to the first Earth Day in 1970. With the passage of time, many of these forecasts have since expired; the dates have come and gone uneventfully. In fact, 48 (61%) of the predictions have already expired as of the end of 2020.”

The radical Greens have NO credibility, make that NEGATIVE credibility – their core competence is propaganda, the fabrication of false alarm.
The scam is much greater than just climate and green energy. Read it and weep:


Ron Long
April 9, 2021 3:08 am

Allan, I’m shocked it took the Germans 20 years to figure out that paying 30 billion Euros a year for nothing more than virtue signaling was stupid.

Reply to  Ron Long
April 9, 2021 7:08 am

Hi Ron,

It’s not just the Germans – almost every developed country made the same incredibly stupid/corrupt blunders – and gave trillions in subsidies to intermittent, worthless wind and solar power fiascos.

Gordon A. Dressler
April 9, 2021 8:00 am

It almost goes without saying that your statement includes the good ol’ USA.

April 9, 2021 8:37 am

Intermittent/renewable. A clever niche filler.

Patrick B
April 9, 2021 10:26 am

And the governments can do it because the costs are hidden. Imagine if every utility bill contained a “Green subsidy” line detailing the monthly subsidy cost? Instead, the governments take general tax revenues and subsidize the windmills and solar farms.

Steve Keppel-Jones
Reply to  Patrick B
April 9, 2021 11:34 am

In Ontario we had, until recently, a “Global Adjustment” on our bills, which was a thinly disguised name for the extra taxes charged to consumers and paid to “renewable” producers on top of the market rate they would otherwise have gotten. This was around 8 (Canadian) cents per kWh, several times higher than the wholesale rate of 2 cents that the nuclear and hydro generators can make electricity for. This line item is gone now, since it was too easy to see how much all that “green” energy was costing, so it’s just part of the base kWh rate instead, which has gone up by about 8 cents as a result.

And of course before they installed all those expensive and unreliable windmills and solar panels, most of our electricity came from nuclear plants and hydro stations, which didn’t produce any CO2 to begin with. So in this environment, all of this “green-ness” is well past the usual stupidity and incompetence inherent in the transformation of other fossil-fuel-powered grids – the ones that are actually emitting CO2 – and pretty far into gibbering insanity (as a cover for a giant involuntary wealth transfer, naturally).

Last edited 1 year ago by stevekj
Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
Reply to  Steve Keppel-Jones
April 9, 2021 1:40 pm


My buddy in Kitchener (next to Waterloo) is still getting 34.5 cents per KWH from his roof-top panels. This system is not 5 years old. I presume then that he will continue to profit for another 15 years, n’est pas? I recall the Wynne government was writing 20 year feed-in contracts.

It seems, given the 8 cent rate, what they are losing on the wind turbine subsidies they are making up with the losses on the PV subsidies.

That logic is akin to the observation that in 1970 there were only 6800 polar bears and after 50 years of catastrophic global warming, there are only 35,000 left.

Steve Keppel-Jones
Reply to  Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
April 9, 2021 1:48 pm

Haha yes Crispin, I suspect his subsidy is a big part of the Global Adjustment. I forget exactly how long those contracts were, but 20 years would not surprise me.

Sure, they may be losing money on every unit kWh sale, but they’ll make it up in volume 🙂 Just like the polar bear losses indeed. It took me a moment to catch your joke about making up one set of losses with a different set of losses 🙂

Reply to  Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
April 9, 2021 6:31 pm

Off topic – how much of the polar bear thing was undercounting?

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Steve Keppel-Jones
April 9, 2021 1:59 pm

Yes, I have been making noise out here on the prairies to prevent similar insanity and have taken some business shots for having done so. Disingenuous engineers working in renewables saying the no one is actually calling for 100% renewables so I’m just erecting a straw man, while you snd I know canada is infested with politicians and high profile ENGO activists that are basically an arm of the federal liberal party who spout this idiocy every day.

What I want to see is these engineers specifically stepping up and publicly stating that 100% renewable on current and conceivable technology is insane fantasy

So far, none seem willing to say it

April 10, 2021 1:48 pm

There IS no fixing stupid.

April 9, 2021 4:56 am

So the Church of Climate Change may be crumbling at its edges, after all?

One can only hope….

Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 7:18 am

Hi Sara,
If we are correct about our third major statement published in 2002, that of imminent global cooling starting about now, we will have even bigger problems with energy shortages. We warned of that energy shortage decades ago.
I think the signs of current cooling are convincing, but I have not done the detailed work to quantify the degree of cooling – a little cooling will be painful, but a lot could be fatal for many good people.
If global cooling costs many lives, where will the warmist fraudsters hide – the mobs with their pitchforks will be after them.

April 9, 2021 10:37 am

large parts of France just lost their entire fruit harvest thanks to a late frost (of which there have been a lot since 2014..)

There’s a complete strategy being bodged into place by Macron now to subsidise this year’s lost crops for the global warming that never came!

apricots, apples, sugar beet, and of course in Bordeaux grapes from 50-100% LOSS in one night of -6C in april.

Now who would have thunk that after what happened in Texas this year?

Reply to  pigs_in_space
April 9, 2021 3:38 pm

And, in not entirely dissimilar thinking – virtually the entire apple crop in Hawkes Bay, New Zealand, lies rotting on the ground, due to the mulish refusal of our betters to allow the normal seasonal workers from the Pacific Islands into the country – because Covid! The acknowledged fact that there was nor is any infection in that population at all is ignored. “Employ the local workforce” our worthy Minister cried. But, despite subsidised housing, offers of frankly ridiculous wages, virtually nobody took up the offer – or if they did, many only intermittently turned up for work.
Our current crop of politicians seem hell bent on returning to the policies of the 1970s. Its a pity few of them are old enough to have any idea of just how stultifying those policies were.

Reply to  pigs_in_space
April 10, 2021 3:49 am

Thank you for your news of crop losses in France and thank everyone for a worthwhile discussion..
My new friend Cap Allon at is chronicling this unfolding global cooling disaster and has a section on his site about crop loss.
Here is a recent such article from
April 6, 2021 Cap Allon
Land masses across the northern hemisphere are experiencing a true taste of the GRAND SOLAR MINIMUM this spring, as while brief pockets of heat have intermittently prevailed, Arctic cold has never been far away, forever-threatening to wipe out those tender early-season crops that have been “tricked” into sprouting.
I will publish an update of my recent article in a month or so, as spring crop failures mount in the Northern Hemisphere.
It saddens me to see this cooling happening, as we predicted in 2002 – it’s like watching a slow-motion train wreck that we tried to warn people about, and nobody would listen. I’ve always been a builder, and to watch the global warming climate fraudsters repeatedly delude idiot politicians and the public has been a depressing debacle. Trillions of dollars of scarce global resources have been squandered on warmist frauds, as our society sleepwalked towards climate-and-green-energy disaster.
I have repeatedly stated that our idiot politicians have brewed the perfect storm, destabilizing the electrical grid with intermittent green energy nonsense at a time when we will need more abundant, reliable energy due to imminent global cooling. I still hope this cooling will be mild and short-lived, but I have no strong opinion, having not done the work to try to quantify it. Let’s hope it is no worse than the Dalton Minimum, and not like the Maunder.

April 11, 2021 5:47 am

For the record – my correct cold forecast from August 2020:

I nailed the current global cold Winter forecast in August 2020 below. The hard part is forecasting where the polar vortex is going next – but those who forecast a warm winter were delusional.

Regarding the warmist loons who claimed “Global Warming caused this extreme cold” – their lies are not even credible enough to be specious.

From previous posts on wattsup:
by Allan M.R. MacRae, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., June 15, 2019
This formula works reasonably well back to 1982, which is the limit of my data availability.
5. UAH LT Global Temperatures can be predicted ~4 months in the future with just two parameters:
UAHLT (+4 months) = 0.2*Nino34Anomaly + 0.15 – 5*SatoGlobalAerosolOpticalDepth (Figs. 5a and 5b)
6. The sequence is Nino34 Area SST warms, seawater evaporates, Tropical atmospheric humidity increases, Tropical atmospheric temperature warms, Global atmospheric temperature warms, atmospheric CO2 increases (Figs.6a and 6b).
I wrote in August 2020:
Check out NIno34 temperatures, again down to Minus 0.6C – winter will be cold.
comment image

Nino34 SST anom’s hit minimums of minus1.4C-1.3C in Oct2020 and Nov2020 – so global coldest temperatures (+4 months) should be Feb2021 and Mar2021.* Spring could also be late in many parts of the world.

Update: Nino34 anomaly stayed below minus0.5C until 7March2021 – Plus 4 months is early April, May, June, July.
Check the beautiful La Nina in the equatorial Pacific Ocean – the blue stuff.
comment image

Update: The La Nina dissipated by March 2021.

Pat from kerbob
April 9, 2021 2:00 pm

Allan, I think Tommy Wils described what will happen to them if your prediction is correct.

Reply to  Pat from kerbob
April 11, 2021 9:47 am


15-20 cm of snow fell on Mount Hernon, Israel’s only ski resort, this weekend. The ski resort was shut down because the road was snowed in.

Mount Hernon is where The Watchers descend to Earth in the apocryphal book of Enoch.

Most of The Watchers were skiers but a few were boarders – who knew?

Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 8:49 am

Allan, I watch the weather forecasts and make a note of first snowfalls (even light snow counts) and last snowfalls. If the pattern is changing, it is slight enough that most people won’t notice it.

There are several reasons for it: I use natural gas (new furnace last fall) to heat my home and cook and do laundry, and the earlier I have to turn on the furnace, the more I’m concerned. It isn’t so much about running the furnace in August, but is it a consistently early pattern developing? That’s what I look at.

And it is becoming a consistent early starting date (mid-September 2020 this time) and the final date for heat also counts. We’re in April, almost mid-April and I still have the furnace running (on automatic).

This is a major concern, in my view. It is not just happening in my area, it is happening in many places.

It could be a fluke, but I just don’t think it is. And the Warmians and the Ecohippies won’t believe it. It doesn’t suit their fantasies.

Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 11:03 am

Evidence that does not support their beliefs is not evidence.

Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 11:46 am

Now, now, Kpar – evidence is an “un-Thing” that does not exist in their reality.
If it does not agree with them, they get stomach aches and want their lattes for comfort. It is a Very Harsh World in which they wander, looking for Eternal Green Things.

Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 12:16 pm

Sara–this is a great title for you coming book, “Eternal Green Things” LOL

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 2:06 pm

Sara, I moved to calgary in 1997 and it was much hotter and drier. I would have to start watering by early July but I also had tomatoes to eat by late July
Now for years it’s cooler and wetter, rarely water but I also don’t start eating tomatoes until almost September

All due to the dastardly influence of CO2, right?

The climate clown scientologists can maybe advise me to put in a greenhouse to make up for the AOWL one in the sky, which I guess I could heat with gas thereby adding CO2 as well?

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 9:09 am

Unfortunately I fear the Church is not crumbling, it will just bray louder for the “need” for the subsidies so the mass stupidity can continue.

Reply to  AGW is Not Science
April 9, 2021 9:59 am

Anything is possible, of course, but there is a finite limit to things like subsidies, as is demonstrated by the article. Also, that unfortunate “thing” politely referred to as reality does raise its head. When the outage occurred in Dallas, i could only sympathize with my family members down there because we have outages at least once a year, and always (for some reason) when I’m on the computer.

Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 10:08 am

A UPS backup is inexpensive, less than $100. I just use a laptop for all my computing, it has a built in UPS.

Reply to  Drake
April 9, 2021 11:12 am

I just had my laptop upgraded to WIn!0. Now I have to get the dainty darlin’ (only weighs 7.5 pounds) put back online and I can use one of my backup drives as a resource…. but there’s that one thing missing from all of this: these critters ALL require electricity and when the battery runs down in an outage, well —-
You get the drift, right?

Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 7:49 pm

Sorry Sara, I didn’t mean to offend. I don’t work on my PC so I would think our situations are different. Anyhoo, with a laptop at least the shutdown is orderly and you should not loose data, even if you are dead in the water.

BUT, my BU generator runs on propane. Have a minimum of 300 hours of fuel on hand at all times. Usually much more, two 500 gallon tanks, about 1.2 gph usage by the generator. We only use about 500 gallons a year and top off 2 times a year, when prices are lowest. We got the 2 tanks when we built the house, worried about snow since any bad winter we would not be able to get refilled, the road is too steep. We are storing excess gas, but that’s OK, propane doesn’t spoil.

We have DSL. What the phone company’s back up is, I don’t know. When power goes out the internet has always worked, so far.

Reply to  Sara
April 10, 2021 5:45 am

“my laptop upgraded to WIn!0”

yes that is about as stupid as you can get.
I ,moved to a raspberry pi – 64bit ARM Linux, as I don’t want to pay any Microsoft tax.

Most notebooks use 70-90W thanks to the Intel monkey monopoly.
Result, no battery in about 2-3hrs.

The little quad core ARM powered device uses 5W.
You get 20-24hrs on the same battery pack as the average wintel notebook full of bloat

It’s the same for the average smartphone.
No charge and you’re dead in under a day.

Using old fashioned phones – you get up to a week without a charge.

I could travel 2000kms/32hrs on Russian railways, still phone or work on a computer during 24hrs esp a RaspberryPi400.

Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 11:04 am

If it’s not Donald Trump’s fault, then it must be yours…

Last edited 1 year ago by Kpar
Reply to  Kpar
April 9, 2021 11:47 am

Y’know, Kpar, you could post a SPEW ALERT!!!! Just out of kindness…..

Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 1:54 pm

I have heard from some of the true believers that the money is just numbers and there is no consequence for creating any amount of numbers. It seems various politicians also believe this. All the believers need to do is shout down the nay sayers and everything will be rosy. This seems to be the new chant that has replaced concern with burdening children and grand children with huge debts.

Reply to  AGW is Not Science
April 9, 2021 11:09 am

I find myself tending to look frequently at kerosene lamps and a manual typewriter these days. Back to handwritten journals, perhaps? Sheepskin or parchment instead of pulp paper, and quill pens instead of Pentel mechanical pencils or all those throwaway ballpoint pens?

Seriously, in reading Georgette Heyer’s Regency novels, placed in the early 19th century, we aren’t all that far away from cooking with an open stove or in the fireplace again.

Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 1:58 pm

We spent a year in an old French farmhouse, cooking on a wood powered stove. The house was REALLY cold in the winter. That was before France put in all its nuclear plants.

YallaYPoora Kid
Reply to  Dennis
April 9, 2021 2:26 am

They were never a perfect solution. Engineers strive for efficiency and productivity both to which are not evident or possible in wind and PV generation. If you look at the global supported Government mandates to make motors more efficient politicians could not get that right either since green ideology overrode the logic which forced some short term operations also comply with efficiency measures – just ignorant and illogical.

John Endicott
Reply to  YallaYPoora Kid
April 9, 2021 3:24 am

Yalla, they were the perfect solution – for government teat suckers. For everyone else, not so much.

Reply to  YallaYPoora Kid
April 9, 2021 6:38 pm

My 1986 Olds Cutlas got 15mpg.
My 2017 Toyota Camry gets 32mpg.

Government regulation (among other factors) had something to do with that.
And also it’s nice that they both ran on unleaded.

Reply to  KevinM
April 9, 2021 8:10 pm

Yep, but the Olds weighed how much and carried how many full sized adults? How much luggage? What about the Camry. What about fuel injection with the associated electronics and spark plugs and wires and etc. The efficiency would have come regardless. I remember that in the day Hondas always needed the brake rotors replaced because they were made so thin for improved gas mileage. So, not really. If the feds had just mandated all cars to have fuel injection, none of the other crap would ever have been needed.

I had an old Nova that was a “transition” vehicle. It had an air pump that pumped air into the exhaust so that the NUMBERS coming out of the tailpipe would be low enough. It was parasitic and didn’t change the actual total of particles just diluted the exhaust gases. That was LEGAL!

I have a diesel that requires DEF, an added expense, and if you do not get it out on the highway it goes through a burn off cycle for the particulate filter. (I don’t have that problem) No need for any of that except in an enclosed valley like LA or Vegas, but ALL new diesel vehicles get that crap, even in Nebraska and Kansas, etc. where it is just waste of fuel. Multiply that by MILLIONS.

In the Las Vegas valley ALL cars and trucks still need a smog check to get your registration renewed. Almost any car less then 10 years old should not need that, but once you create the system, it is almost impossible to get rid of it. And with OBiden in office, they will reduce the allowed “pollutants” again so there will always be a “PROBLEM”.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  KevinM
April 10, 2021 5:39 am

Gas prices and the move to smaller cars to compensate had more to do with it than the government did.

Reply to  Dennis
April 9, 2021 5:30 am

… once free market capitalism based wealthy nations …

Apparently the free market is now working correctly for electricity in Germany. The complaint of the wind operator is that prices are too low, as little as one cent per kwh. Hah! He should be grateful he doesn’t have to pay them to take his electricity.

The market cares a lot about when it gets electricity. It is obvious that wind can’t be economical in a free market. Of course that’s no surprise to WUWT readers.

The other thing I hope happens is that the snake oil salesmen, who claim that wind power out-competes all other sources, are laughed out of the room.

Rich Davis
Reply to  commieBob
April 9, 2021 1:52 pm

He’s talkin’ ’bout YOU, griff!

willem post
Reply to  Dennis
April 9, 2021 7:20 am

Huckster No. 1

Warren Buffett Quote: “I will do anything that is basically covered by the law to reduce Berkshire’s tax rate,” Buffet told an audience in Omaha, Nebraska recently. “For example, on wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense without the tax credit.”

Huckster No. 2

Green Mountain Power, GMP: Vermont utilities buy about 1.4 million MWh/y of hydro power, at 5.7 c/kWh, under a 20-y contract, from Hydro Quebec. The HQ electricity is not variable, not intermittent and does not cause midday solar bulges

GMP, a Canadian company, does not want to buy more hydro power from HQ, because that electricity would just be a “pass-through”, on which GMP would make minimal profit. HQ has the electricity and is eager to sell it to Vermont.

Instead, GMP wants to install solar/battery system combos all over Vermont. as part of its expensive micro-grid strategy. The solar electricity (already very expensive; see table 2) is variable, is intermittent and causes midday solar bulges. However, the batteries would very-expensively take care of those grid-disturbing deficiencies. 
The solar/battery combo strategy is much more profitable for GMP, even though it would lead to significantly increase electricity costs for Vermonters.

Both systems come with: 1) grants from various sources, 2) 30% federal investment tax credits, plus state FITs, 3) 100% depreciation over 5 years, plus 4) deduction of interest on any borrowed money. The tax credits reduce, dollar-for-dollar, the taxes GMP would have to pay on net profits.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  willem post
April 9, 2021 9:13 am

A perfect illustration of how Ronald Reagan was right.

Robert of Texas
April 8, 2021 10:25 pm

Now if only Texas will follow suit…

What are they doing with all the scrap? Burying it?

Reply to  Robert of Texas
April 9, 2021 12:46 am

Re scrap: when you see the dump, it will help to think of it as carbon capture

Reply to  Robert of Texas
April 9, 2021 2:33 am

I wonder, but it wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if the same thieves who were paid with taxpayer money to erect the bird choppers are now being paid with taxpayer money to dismantle them.

Reply to  Robert of Texas
April 9, 2021 8:10 am


Maybe we could the turbine blades in Texas to build a fence!

..Gums sends…

Reply to  Gums
April 9, 2021 10:16 am

Yes, and then when the illegals cut through the fence, they would be exposed to carcinogens and not only get to stay in the US, but sue the government. A perfect storm for the left/Democrats, more money to their #1 special interest group/donation source, the trial lawyers, and they get more voters. sarc, or not.

Reply to  Robert of Texas
April 9, 2021 11:05 am

Maybe they could recycle the blades into airplane wings?

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Kpar
April 9, 2021 2:09 pm

You take the first flight?

Abolition Man
April 8, 2021 10:46 pm

Well, well! It looks like the Germans have fallen for some more silver-tongued conmen! Not content with following the Pied Piper and that guy with the funny, little mustache down dead end roads; they threw away billions on unreliable wind and solar power that are already beginning to age out of their generation fleet!

It’s a good thing they shut down their nuclear energy before they suffered the ZERO fatalities that the Japanese suffered in Fukushima from the horrendous nuclear accident there! At least they will be able to rely on Putin and Russia for their future energy needs! It’ll be just like taking candy from a hungry bear!

The next few winters should be a lot of fun for all Germans; especially the poor and elderly! Choosing between food and heat makes life seem so much more adventurous!

Reply to  Abolition Man
April 8, 2021 11:18 pm

All good in Germany, the government is constructing a natural gas pipeline to Russia.

And importing electricity via interconnectors from Poland (coal fired power stations) and France (nuclear power stations). Which is sort of amusing given that the German Government decided to get rid of Germany’s nuclear power stations and coal fuelled.

With them you will not adventure.

Craig from Oz
Reply to  Dennis
April 8, 2021 11:48 pm

To Russia.

From Poland.

and France.

Quiz – how many of these countries are governed (currently at least) by Germany?

Reply to  Craig from Oz
April 9, 2021 11:06 am

Sounds like the verses from “Springtime for Hitler”.

mike macray
Reply to  Dennis
April 9, 2021 5:58 am

…and France (nuclear power stations).
Much safer to put them West of the Rhine!

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Dennis
April 9, 2021 9:19 am

I seem to recall the French indicating they intend to start shutting down their nuclear power plants – when they do, the REAL fun will start.

Reply to  AGW is Not Science
April 9, 2021 9:30 am

They realised the need of these plants and stopped the shut down.

Reply to  Krishna Gans
April 9, 2021 10:42 am

…Not before vandalising a perfect good one in Alsace which has practically no other high powered source of power than Fessenheim.

The greenies also insisted on shutting down all oil refineries in Strasbourg and other stupid capers, then said it was a brilliant idea to go after geo-thermal which turns out makes for lots of minor earthquakes.

Reply to  pigs_in_space
April 9, 2021 11:56 am

I’m curious as to what could possibly be wrong with the use of geothermal energy, in the squidgy-smothered minds of the greenbeaners?

It’s a completely natural, earth-based process created by the planet. Iceland is loaded with geothermal energy and uses it. Watching Baby Bob and Baby Flo turn in to real volcanoes (three vents to date and lots of flowage) makes it clear that Icelanders are probably the smartest eco-friendly bunch of people on the planet.

So how can using geothermal resources be wrong?

Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 1:50 pm

Iceland is special and not to compare.
Germany, Swizzerland, France (Alsace) were trying geothermal, and stopped because of a lot of earthquakes, and not only there.

Geothermal Energy and Induced EarthquakesIn Switzerland, man-made earthquakes are related mainly to geothermal energy projects. In 2006, an earthquake in Basel with a magnitude of 3.4 was triggered by water being injected at high pressure into the ground, and an earthquake with a magnitude of 3.5 occurred near St. Gallen in 2013.

Scientists have linked a magnitude 5.5 earthquake to enhanced geothermal power, raising new questions about the safety of the emerging technology when the U.S. government and other countries are investing millions of dollars researching and deploying new systems.
The findings about last year’s disaster in Pohang, South Korea, were reported in two studies in Science yesterday and involve the largest quake by far tied to geothermal power.

Last edited 1 year ago by Krishna Gans
Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 2:13 pm

Remove heat from the core
Core solidifies
Magnetic field collapses
We all die or turn into the Hulk from exposure to interstellar radiation.

There is no free lunch

And, sarc

Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 8:21 pm

I guess the thing is, it needs to be where the resources are. NIMBY applies to coal, or gas, or nuclear, but not to “renewables”.

Reply to  Abolition Man
April 9, 2021 3:22 am

If the current track globally continues for green energy we’ll end up in a post-versailles world that Germany had to suffer through in the 1920s.

April 8, 2021 10:48 pm

The Texas blackout was very bold.
Germans take precautions.

Reply to  Alex
April 8, 2021 11:47 pm

Maybe at Octoberfest in October the beer manufacturers will claim “they took the wind out of our ales”?

Reply to  Dennis
April 9, 2021 5:54 am

Oktoberfest in October?
Oktoberfest in Munich 2021 will begin on
Saturday, 18 September
and ends on
Sunday, 3 October
Hmm. Just about.

Reply to  Alex
April 11, 2021 8:37 am

re: “The Texas blackout”

Texas never had a “Blackout” per se. Maybe you didn’t hear properly?

Blackout conveys that a VERY specific ‘thing’ happened, which it did NOT happen in Texas. That ‘thing’ that “Blackout” means is: ALL generation in Texas was lost, and it was not lost in Texas. There were ‘rolling blackouts‘ where the intent is to shut down various distribution circuits from a substation for short periods of time to reduce load on the system, but after which those circuits are re-energized. Unfortunately, in a number of cases those circuits did not come back up, resulting in extended periods of no power for some people.

Reply to  _Jim
April 12, 2021 4:00 am

Wow, you are a special kind of stupid. Go to Texas and tell them, face to face, there was not a power blackout.

April 8, 2021 11:39 pm

Griff is in mourning

Reply to  Lrp
April 9, 2021 5:01 am

Maybe Prince Philip can come back as a virus.

Richard Page
Reply to  Scissor
April 9, 2021 7:48 am

Too soon. Don’t forget that he said that remark as a joke, as a solution to human OVER population, not as a general anti-human comment that some of these environmentalist whackjobs believe. He classed greens as ‘bunny-huggers’ and recognised that the vast majority didn’t have a clue as to what was important to nature conservation or the environment.

Reply to  Richard Page
April 9, 2021 11:07 am

It is his kid, Charlie, that is the enviroweenie.

Reply to  Kpar
April 10, 2021 4:50 am

Charlie Chump is the result of breeding from a restricted gene-pool.

Last edited 1 year ago by 1saveenergy
Dennis G Sandberg
April 8, 2021 11:55 pm

China ended subsidies for wind and solar January 1, 2021, and something like the $17 billion they are behind in paying generators for projects completed is being “renegotiated’. Now if someone will explain to Joe/Kamala/Nancy/Chuckie that wind and solar are worth less than nothing junk….oh ya, and AOC.

Reply to  Dennis G Sandberg
April 9, 2021 10:25 am

With smart meters, the government, through the utility companies, can shut off power to any individual house with a touch of the keyboard.

When the new government comes in, just get the list of all who voted for the green schemes and cut their power off first, to all their houses at the same time. Ex. Power outage in Tenn, then cut off powers to ALL of Al Gores properties in all states and US territories, including any business with a more than 5% stake. Also shut off their natural gas. This will take a site visit, so charge the costs to them. Charge them double to turn it back on.

And do this for at least the 40 years this BS has been ongoing.

Reply to  Drake
April 11, 2021 8:46 am

re: “With smart meters, the government, through the utility companies, can shut off power to any individual house with a touch of the keyboard.”

TWO solutions exist: a) Aluminum foil over the meter. Unfortunately, the back of the meter cannot be accessed in order to extend the shield there, so, some signal leakage will occur.

b) Operate a US Title 47 CFR Part 97 (Amateur Radio) transmitter in relatively close proximity to said meter. In our area the 900 MHz ISM band is used for meter reading and control, this band is also allocated as a ‘ham’ band. The meter can be made to not ‘hear’ a command to open it’s internal service switch.
In any case, notice will be made to the distribution authority that meter S/N such and such is “unresponsive” to queries and commands. Subsequent replacement of said meter by the authority is the ‘usual’ (first) response.

Last edited 1 year ago by _Jim
Reply to  _Jim
April 12, 2021 4:02 am

You need to loosen the tinfoil on your head, it is cutting off the flow of oxygen to what is left of your brain. Tell us about chemtrails now. This ought to be good!

April 9, 2021 12:01 am

Wind generators are resource hungry. I expect Germans are beginning to realise that all their economic output would be consumed just making electricity if they continue down the path of more wind generators. Wind generators use almost two orders of magnitude more materials than thermal generators.

Electricity production in Germany has been in decline since 2017. That is inconsistent with the drive for more electric powered vehicles. It means the German economy is in decline and it was happening before Covid.
comment image?itok=NK1Uiqqh

The word “renewable” is used incorrectly. In 2020 Germany sourced 3.3% of its electricity from hydro and 8.9% from biomass. These are the only two sources that can be deemed renewable. The 30% of electricity that it got from intermittent sources is already pushing the limit of grid stability. It is only possible by imposing unrecognised economic burden on neighbouring countries that sink excess intermittent power and source on-demand power.

Germany can only continue down this path if the rest of the world fall into line with the same crushing reduction in living standard imposed worldwide.

Last edited 1 year ago by RickWill
Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  RickWill
April 9, 2021 2:45 am

Rick, interesting to see that biomass is 8.9% of electricity in German. Do you have a source for that? Anti forestry people in America ( hate the fact that Europeans use any biomass at all. I didn’t realize that biomass was that important in Germany but glad to see it, me being a forester. I don’t think Germany imports wood chips for this purpose, unlike the Drax plant in Britain- but instead, they intensely manage their forests.

Last edited 1 year ago by Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
April 9, 2021 4:45 am

biomass includes gardening waste, Christmas trees, untreated construction lumber, agricultural waste (shit), water treatment solids (more shit), …

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  RLu
April 9, 2021 4:52 am

right- I wonder what percent of the total is from forestry work

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
April 9, 2021 5:40 am

The huge Scandinavian forest industry provides a lot of the wood waste for Germany as chips for the biomass biz, either for pulp, chip board or the rest of the dregs burnt for electricity. Converting it to biogas is in the works, and will be much more efficient in a CCGT type burner.

As you know, commercial forestry world wide utilizes over 2 Billion m3 of wood annually. That is a lot of wood waste, considering about 1/3 winds up as wood waste of some type. At least biomass is base load synchronous spinning reserve, a much higher electricity product than intermittent asynchronous junk electricity from solar and wind.

Reply to  Earthling2
April 9, 2021 4:01 pm

Most of the industrial wood waste is used on site to provide process heat – or, is used as input for re-manufactured products – think medium density fibreboard or oriented strand board.
The majority of non merchantable wood, though, remains in the forest, as it often has negative revenues once transport is taken into account. The exceptions are if there is an industry that can utilize the fibre in close proximity, or, subsidization for political reasons is applied. In that event, any rational economic reasons become redundant.

John Pickens
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
April 9, 2021 5:08 am

I’ve been to Germany, and seen for myself the farmland growing maize. I was staying with a farm owning friend, and he was leasing land for maize production. All of the harvested corn was going straight to an incinerator for electricity production.

While a huge subsidy nightmare, at least the ethanol produced in the US from corn has a significant foodstuff byproduct. In Germany, not so much.

Pamela Matlack-Klein
Reply to  John Pickens
April 9, 2021 5:44 am

I have always thought burning corn for heat or electricity was immoral. We have so many excellent sources of fuel, burning food should be at the very bottom of the list, below dried peat and manure!

Joao Martins
Reply to  RickWill
April 9, 2021 5:10 am

Please, consider: biomass is NOT renewable per se; it is, but up to a limit.

Biomass is ONLY renewable when the wood consumption is equal to the wood material produced during the same period of time.

The question of being renewable is not answered shallowly by saying that it consumes something that grows out of thin air (literally). If you chop down 100 acres of forest and burn it to produce electricity, the energy produced will be consumed in how much time? Is it possible to grow 100 acres of trees of the same size in that period? If the answer is “yes”, then it is rneewable. The proof that it is not is, Germany (and other European countries) are using their wood and it is not enough, they must buy American chips to keep the power plants working and reach their quotas of renewables. And very soon you will see in the USA the result of this commerce in the depletion of forests.

In Bruxelese language, the loopholes for the green idiocies are concealed by name changes and legalese little twist in what they call “Taxonomies”. If the leaders agree that burning wood is renewable, then it is: they use Taxonomy to change the classification of the industrial process. In the last weeks, I suspect that it was due to the publication of an official report on the inefficiency of wind generation, they started to apply Taxonomy to nuclear and, surprise!, it is no longer evil, it was reclassified as renewable and indispensable…

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Joao Martins
April 9, 2021 6:50 am

“Biomass is ONLY renewable when the wood consumption is equal to the wood material produced during the same period of time.”

That may only be true if you are a believer in the climate emergency religion. However, most active forestry nations grow wood as fast as its being harvested. Here in New England, it’s been argued by some foresters that we should cut even heavier than growth, for a period, because the forests are in such bad shape due to past high grading (where they cut the best and left the rest).

Mike Dubrasich
Reply to  Joao Martins
April 9, 2021 10:29 am

Commercial depletion of forests? Where, when?

Here in the USA we harvest a tiny fraction of annual growth. Biomass levels on national and state forests exceed any point in the Holocene. Un-management leads to fuel accumulations that engender catastrophic holocausts: megafires of millions of acres where hundreds of tons per acre are incinerated, conflagrations that spread to private lands and even cities leaving death and destruction in their wake.

The touchy-feely ecotards who want “save” our forests from any harvesting ought to visit some of the moon-scaped wastelands that are the direct, predictable, and preventable consequences of their foolish policies. Take a tour of the old-growth preservation set-asides that are today burned out snag land converted to tick brush and tell me what boon to the environment that nutty program was.

Who cares what the biomass is used for as long as the trash is removed and our forests are thereby saved from total annihilation?

willem post
Reply to  RickWill
April 9, 2021 7:31 am

Oh, No, No No.

Nearby countries import German overflow electricity (when it is windy and sunny) at low grid prices (because of a German surplus), and export to Germany when it is NOT windy and NOT sunny, at high grid prices (because of a German shortage).

The Netherlands is one of the major beneficiaries.

The German Household ratepayers get screwed front and back, up and down, and sideways

Reply to  willem post
April 9, 2021 8:12 am

“Export” means, in often happening cases the prices are negative, Germany has to pay for the overflow electricity taken by nearby countries.
Fine buisiiness modell for the nighbours.

Reply to  RickWill
April 9, 2021 6:49 pm

Nice chart.
Amazing, no natural gas boom.

Craig from Oz
April 9, 2021 12:14 am


You know what goes into landfill? Anything that is not economical to recycle. On a good day your landfill will decay naturally and the land may one day be reclaimed. On a bad day the landfill will remain effectively unchanged for decades.

Anyone like to host an argument as to how, in the context of wind energy, landfill is ‘Sustainable’?

Or maybe ‘Landfill Worker’ is one of these new ‘Green Jobs’ we hear so much about?

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Craig from Oz
April 9, 2021 12:25 am

And those smart enough will tap the CH4 out if it, use it rather than simply burn it on site in to open air.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Craig from Oz
April 9, 2021 2:47 am

At least in Massachusetts- landfills are the favorite place to install solar “farms”.

Reply to  Craig from Oz
April 9, 2021 9:54 am

Nothing decomposes in a landfill. There is no oxygen after compacting with fill.

April 9, 2021 12:32 am

To my mind, it is crucial to get the idea through to the German public that Energiewende has collapsed. Otherwise soft soap will be applied in spades and the guilty parties will move seamlessly onto a new set of lies (apologies for mixed metaphors).

Reply to  Mike Jonas
April 9, 2021 12:58 am

Mike what do you think about this recent Norwegian co2 study. Here’s my 2 bobs worth at Jo Nova’s site. Am I in the ball park? See my comment after a couple of paragraphs.

I’ve looked at Pat Condell’s videos a number of times and he’s definitely one of the best at his craft.
But the hostility you can sometimes observe by discussing the climate or weather today is amazing. Some people agree but some get very hostile and insist you shut up or stop lying.
BTW here’s a recent study trying to measure the extra warming from co2.
A recent Norwegian study has tried to measure any extra warming from co2 and seems to be be very thorough and with a number of checks and balances. BTW they conclude that co2 warming may be 0.5% and I think that would be about 0.07c of warming if the global average temp ( for example) was about 14.5 c. Here’s the link and abstract and their conclusions.
Abstract” The Greenhouse Effect was simulated in a laboratory setup, consisting of a heated ground area and two chambers, one filled with air and one filled with air or CO2. While heating the gas the temperature and IR radiation in both chambers were measured. IR radiation was produced by heating a metal plate mounted on the rear wall. Reduced IR radiation through the front window was observed when the air in the foremost chamber was exchanged with CO2. In the rear chamber, we observed increased IR radiation due to backscatter from the front chamber. Based on the Stefan Boltzmann’s law, this should increase the temperature of the air in the rear chamber by 2.4 to 4 degrees, but no such increase was found. A thermopile, made to increase the sensitivity and accuracy of the temperature measurements, showed that the temperature with CO2 increased slightly, about 0.5%”.
5.” Conclusion The results of our study show the near-identical heating curves when we change from air to 100% CO2 or to Argon gas with low CO2 concentration. Nevertheless, we observed absorption of IR radiation in the front chamber. We also observed the increased radiation density in the rear chamber due to the backscatter from CO2. The change in observed backscatter radiation should give us a measurable temperature increase of 2.4 to 4 K by using the Stefan Boltzmann law. But we only observe a very slight temperature increase due to CO2 backscatter. This indicates that heating, due to IR backscatter from CO2, is much less than what is assumed from the Stefan Boltzmann law or from the forcing Equation (1a) and Equation (1b). The near-identical heating curves for all the three gases indicate that the thermal energy transfer is only driven by the temperature of the back wall of the rear chamber. Without extra heating of the walls in the rear chamber, the air temperature cannot increase. These findings might question the fundament of the forcing laws used by the IPCC. Another possibility is that our setup has unexplained heat losses that cancel the effect of the increased backscatter IR and prevent higher temperatures in the rear chamber, but after testing this and finding only slight losses, we do not see that this could be the case”.

Steve Richards
Reply to  Neville
April 9, 2021 2:29 am

Neville, the paper you found is a bit of a find:
If replicated, improved and verified, it will blow CAGW out of the water!

It deserves a thread of its own here…

Reply to  Steve Richards
April 9, 2021 3:08 am

Thanks Steve, but am I in the ball park quoting 0.5% of say 14.5 c = 0.07 c or should the 0.5% be taken as that percentage of say 1.4 c/ century using UAH V 6 data? That’s about 0.007c.

Reply to  Steve Richards
April 9, 2021 12:33 pm

And that is without all the atmospheric effects like convection and bulk air movement. !

Reply to  Steve Richards
April 10, 2021 12:48 am

Such a simple and obvious experiment! I can’t understand why it has taken until now to perform.

If this work holds up and can be replicated independently, the whole CAGW edifice will collapse.

Reply to  Neville
April 9, 2021 2:43 am

Neville – an interesting-looking paper. Thx. I will try to work through it in the next day or two.

Reply to  Mike Jonas
April 9, 2021 3:15 am

Thanks Mike, but am I in the ball park quoting 0.5% of say 14.5 c = 0.07 c or should the 0.5% be taken as that percentage of say 1.4 c/ century using say UAH V 6 data? That’s about 0.007c.
I’ve asked Steve the same above, because you blokes would be light years ahead of me at maths. Like Steve, I’d be interested to know what Jo and David think of the study?

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Neville
April 9, 2021 7:26 am

Using percent changes for temperature only has meaning for absolute temperatures, i.e. Kelvin, not Celsius.

Jack Niagara
Reply to  Neville
April 9, 2021 9:30 am

As a physicist, my reading is 0.5% of the expected 2.4 to 4K temperature différence. This means 12 to 20 milli K.

Reply to  Neville
April 9, 2021 8:42 pm

I have now read the Seim & Olsen paper. I find it curious that they did find a CO2 effect at both sensors IR1 (decrease) and IR2 (increase), which seems to prove that they did indeed find a ‘greenhouse effect’, even though it didn’t show up in the temperatures. I think they need to do more work on where the energy was going, ie. an energy balance, before they can claim a meaningful finding.

I agree also with other comments here that percentages when applied to temperature must use Kelvin.

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Neville
April 9, 2021 8:12 am

To me, this just validates the 2nd law of thermodynamics. The back wall and atmosphere reach an equilibrium and radiates into the front chamber. The amount of radiation is determined by its temperature. CO2 will absorb only some of this radiation (see absorbivity/emissivity) and re-radiate some energy. Because CO2 radiates in a spherical fashion only half of the absorbed energy will be “back radiated”. CO2’s radiation will be from a lower temperature. The 2nd law says the net radiation will be from hotter to colder.

What this means is that “back radiation” can not make a hot body hotter, that is raise its temperature. It can only slow the rate of cooling of the hotter body, that is, decrease the rate of temperature decrease.

Too many folks forget that a body radiates energy based on a formula that has several components other than just temperature.

E = εAσT^4

ε = emissivity
A = surface area
σ = S-B constant
T = Temp in K

What is the difference in emissivity between the plate, air, and CO2?
What is the difference in surface areas between the plate, air, and CO2?

I am surprised they measured any change and suspect there are other “effects” from the experimental setup.

Reply to  Neville
April 11, 2021 11:49 am

Any of you blokes ever pointed a garden variety IR thermometer at the sky (preferably straight up) – on different days when the humidity levels were high then low?

You do realize most of these IR thermometers ‘look’ at the 8 – 14 um wavelength, roughly right around what is termed the ‘atmospheric window’?

Let me know what values of readings you see (I’ve already done this, but it’s the ‘realization’ when one does it that this exercise is meant to bring to the fore.)

Reply to  _Jim
April 12, 2021 4:04 am

Man, with you the hits just keep coming.

M Courtney
April 9, 2021 12:34 am

We should sing a lament for a dying industry,

“Monorail, Monorail, Monorail”.

Bruce Cobb
April 9, 2021 12:49 am

I suppose it would be cruel to point and laugh. So I’ll let Nelson do it:

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
April 9, 2021 2:41 am

…. and this too:

Well that didn’t pan out

April 9, 2021 12:50 am

When you see German “Federal Government and the states have agreed on an emergency plan for securing the food supply,” if you are Jewish, Black, Romany. or Polish, Ukrainian, Dutch, or Czech, Hungarian…you had better begin to pay attention.

Reply to  dk_
April 9, 2021 2:54 am

What? … no Turkish, ah, yes those two Turks invented Pfizer vaccine so they have at least to give them a bacon sandwich with a half a gallon of beer each, hm, … thinking about it, they might not want to consume either of the two, so end result is as initially intended. /sarc

April 9, 2021 1:00 am

The North 2 pipeline is nearly complete but Boden is desperate to stop it at this late stage. It looks like Germany will go ahead regardless of American pressure.

John Endicott
Reply to  Vuk
April 9, 2021 3:29 am

Given the mess they’ve made of their energy supply, Germany pretty much has no choice but to go ahead.

Bill Toland
April 9, 2021 1:09 am

It is informative that the operating costs of the wind turbines exceed the value of the power produced, even with all of the capital costs of building the wind turbines and power lines already paid for. This beautifully demonstrates how utterly uneconomic wind power actually is.

Paul C
Reply to  Bill Toland
April 9, 2021 3:07 am

Incredible, but we can see from when people actually operate intermittents for themselves what is needed to make a system viable (cabins, yachts). Off grid systems always need a battery system to shift the intermittent supply to be available when demanded. Even then, they require demand-side management, and a fossil fuel generator as backup in spite of having a nameplate capacity far in excess of expected demand. All that additional cost is hidden by the grid-connected intermittents collecting subsidy while at the same time not contributing to the costs they impose on the grid.

Pamela Matlack-Klein
April 9, 2021 2:48 am

So it begins, tiny cracks in the Green Block, as aged windmills are scrapped because they have ceased to be profitable without the subsidies. Who could have predicted this state of affairs…besides most of us? And promoting the use of heat pumps in northern Europe? What total madness. Unless these things have improved hugely in the past 15 years, my experience in central Virginia demonstrated that they are worthless at heating a home to comfortable levels. The very expensive back-up electric coils kick in and people end up with $500/month or more electricity bills!

Reply to  Pamela Matlack-Klein
April 10, 2021 5:13 am

Heat pumps work well when hooked to a geothermal sink. Though I’d like to see how that works out in a tightly packed city type neighborhood.

April 9, 2021 2:53 am

Funny how economic reality always trumps Green wishful thinking in the end.

April 9, 2021 3:20 am

I met a traveler from an antique land
Who said: a rusting column, overgrown
Stands on a hillside. By it, close at hand
Half sunk, a long and curving shaft lies prone
Though crumpled and corroded by the rain
Its sculptor’s purpose still is plain to see
A giant windmill, spinning to entrain
From tortured gearing, electricity
And on the pedestal these words appear
“Energiewende – to a future green
Look on our ranks, deniers, and despair”
Nothing beside remains, round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, the meadows fair
And forests breathing life stretch far away

(Adapted from “Ozymandius” by Shelley)

April 9, 2021 3:23 am

I find this very hard to believe…

and anyway, there’s going to be a considerable increase in offshore wind…

Reply to  griff
April 9, 2021 3:35 pm

Dud, do not forget to take your pill before posting.

Reply to  griff
April 10, 2021 9:55 am

Just keep repating your lies, they will keep you warm in the winter, and fed. What a moron.

Reply to  griff
April 9, 2021 11:46 am

You know, there is a difference between wishing, planning and building.
Your links seem to be more wishfull thinking 😀

Last edited 1 year ago by Krishna Gans
Reply to  Krishna Gans
April 9, 2021 12:40 pm

griff will gullibly “believe” anything his renewable buddies propagandise.


comment image

Reply to  Krishna Gans
April 9, 2021 7:55 pm

Nope Griff doesn’t 🙂

I love the key idea in being pushed by the greentard authors “An increase of 30% in the next ten years is required to achieve the target”. How do they think they will achieve that “The target of 71GW of onshore wind by 2030 and carbon neutrality
by 2050 can be addressed by making amendments to the existing auction
mechanism and project licensing for onshore wind projects.” That is codespeak for the long suffering German public pay more.

The thorn in the plan is the proponents got smashed in the last election and it took months to cobble a government together and current polling says they will do worse at next election.

April 9, 2021 3:34 am

For once I would ‘fact check’ this story as FALSE. Repower still exceeds decommission and then you have new projects as well (which although much reduced of late are still going up/coming on-line).

comment image

Roy Martin
Reply to  MrGrimNasty
April 9, 2021 5:15 am

Link to the paper with your graph (for onshore) is here:

Offshore is also in decline:

The graphs show what has happened before, the post under discussion is about the future without subsidies.

False for now – true for the future?

Bryan A
Reply to  Roy Martin
April 9, 2021 5:38 am

Looks like Germany might be reaching Peak Wind

Tim Gorman
Reply to  MrGrimNasty
April 9, 2021 5:19 am

The NDR reports that in the coming years, 16 GW of wind power will be removed from the subsidy system. Almost two-thirds of this may not be replaced by new, more powerful ones.”

It’s the trend that matters.

Ed Zuiderwijk
April 9, 2021 3:50 am

The really importent message here is that the turning monsters are not being decommissioned because they don’t work anymore, most still do, but because they were installed under a contract guaranteeing subsidies for twenty years, twenty years ago. Because subsidy runs out they can’t he operated ‘economically’. So even after 20 years they still need to be subsidised, which gives the lie to the promises made twenty years ago that the contraptions would pay for themselves. The inference an increasing number of people who actually matter are making is that windpower never will.

April 9, 2021 4:03 am
April 9, 2021 4:52 am

“They are no longer profitable to operate…” Ummm…. what? When were they EVER profitable to operate? Oh, yeah – all those subsidies and other financial stuff and that’s gone, no contract renewals….

And to think, I was grumbling about repairing two window screens on my house for a summer that may be cooler than usual… and wetter…. and….

Well, here’s hoping there are plenty of butterflies and some moths and dragons for me to photograph this spring and summer.

I will always be mystified by the idea that wind energy could be made commercial, which was totally bogus.

Abolition Man
Reply to  Sara
April 9, 2021 5:29 am

They were quite “profitable” for the wealthy investors and griffters that milked the middle class of the subsidies! Now the poor and middle class get to keep on paying for them through substantially higher rates and fewer manufacturing jobs!
Once again, the wealthy did quite well for themselves while increasing the burdens on those with less power, money and influence!
The Marxist’s perfect storm; brought to you by Marxists for your own good! Enjoy, or else!

Justin Burch
April 9, 2021 6:41 am

The wind thing is interesting but I am far more concerned about this. ““Emergency plan for the food supply. Berlin. The Federal Government and the states have agreed on an emergency plan for securing the food supply, according to information from Federal agriculture Minister Julai Klöckner (CDU). as an example for a supply crisis she named a ‘massive power outage”, she told in an interview with this newspaper.” I fear the latest green scam is going to be collectivization of the farms in Germany in the name of securing the food supply. We all know how that works.

April 9, 2021 7:09 am

Where is our “stringer” for German “Energiewende” in UK ? 😀 😀

Al Miller
April 9, 2021 7:23 am

A monorail that’s what is needed, a monorail I say!

Reply to  Al Miller
April 9, 2021 9:00 am

Monorail, Monorail!

Jean Parisot
April 9, 2021 7:31 am

At least they take them down. Is there some sort of restoration bond in Germany that discourages abandonment?

Ed Zuiderwijk
Reply to  Jean Parisot
April 9, 2021 8:04 am

The organisation had a project last year to the effect of proposing environmentally kosher methods to recycle materials of windmills. My guess is the steel goes back to Krupp and the blades to landfill.

Gordon A. Dressler
April 9, 2021 7:57 am

From the above article: Horst Mengels stated, in disappointment, “Politics is completely despondent, hesitant and dithering. Economics Minister Altmeier is the gravedigger of the energy transition.”

Well, he certainly had a different position as long as he was receiving the full government subsidies for ALL of his 99 wind turbines as part of “the energy transition”.

April 9, 2021 8:20 am

We have reached “Peak Griff”.

Steve Z
April 9, 2021 8:30 am

Meanwhile, while Germany was subsidizing all those wind turbines, they were shutting down nuclear power plants, which also do not emit CO2. If there is a power shortage due to increasing demand and decreasing supply of wind power, will they restart the nuclear plants or have to build new ones?

Neighboring France to the west produces about 75% of its electricity from nuclear power plants, with most of the rest from hydroelectric plants near dams in the Pyrenees and Alps. Will Germany be forced to buy electric power from France? The French will certainly sell it to them, if the price is right! Besides, the spent fuel from French nuclear plants is buried in Germany!

April 9, 2021 9:05 am

A quick pass through the thread and not a peep from griff. Rather telling, even its staunchest defenders stand silent, if only they had shame for their blatant lies.

Gary Pearse
April 9, 2021 9:07 am

“Economics Minister Altmeier is the gravedigger of the energy transition.”

This by a crony capitalist who own the mills that aren’t economic without a huge subsidy that has tripled German consumer electricity costs. The grave is for this fellow’s gravy boat.

I’ve noted in the past that those ‘experts’ with jobs, PhDs and silly titles heading up the faculties, institutes and gov departments of “Saving the Planet” will one day come to see that their legacies are a cruel joke, that they were shallow, elevated high above their intellectual capacities and were just a terrible drain on the wellbeing of their fellow humanity. Gee, dad, what did you do back in those silly days?

The fallout psychologically will be pandemic. The Climate Blues caused by ‘The Dreaded Pause’ is only a small foreshadowing. And what of Western Universities (I’ve been scoping out Japanese, Indian and other alternatives outside the corrupted university calamity of the West for my grandchildren)?

Danley Wolfe
April 9, 2021 9:09 am

Perfect answer to a perfect example of wrong planning …” der wind ausfahrt” (wind exit) – translated – the answer my friend is blowing in the wind.(Bob Dylan or Joan Baez, your choice).

April 9, 2021 9:40 am

Only one thing better than tilting at windmills:
And that is tearing them down.
Somehow, the Etta James song comes to mind:
“At Last”.

Abolition Man
Reply to  Bob Hoye
April 9, 2021 9:12 pm

Maybe some of the towers can be converted to raptor nesting sites to try and restore the birds most often killed by the bird choppers: our beautiful hawks and eagles!

April 9, 2021 9:48 am

Can’t wait to see Wind Farms on “Mysteries of the Abandoned”.

April 9, 2021 10:25 am

16 GW coming offline

The NDR reports that in the coming years, 16 GW of wind power will be removed from the subsidy system. Almost two-thirds of this may not be replaced by new, more powerful ones.

So not “coming off line” but losing subsidy status. NOT the same thing.

More coming offline than what is being added

Last year, only 200 new wind turbines were built. At the current rate, more turbine capacity will be coming offline than what is being added.

The heading is written as a current factual event. The rest of the explanation shows that it is another of those “trends” projected forward to a hypothetical future which is then presented as happening now. Where have we seen that kind of tactic before.

The developments are interesting but I do not trust this misleading source for a minute. He is spinning to fit his own narrative totally distorting the facts.

BTW it’s Altenstadt not Altenstedt

Reply to  Greg
April 9, 2021 11:02 am

You may use your search engine to find out, for how many mills the demolition began and is on the way.

Last edited 1 year ago by Krishna Gans
April 9, 2021 10:36 am

Of course this will be absent from the MSM. Wouldn’t want people to get the wrong ideas from the truth.

Tom Abbott
April 9, 2021 10:40 am

I didn’t see any comments from Griff. Maybe he fell out of his chair after reading the title of the article.

April 9, 2021 10:42 am

Those are used up subsidies littering the ground. It is the ratepayers that are still up there on the hook.

April 9, 2021 12:38 pm

Who pays for dismantle, transport, and final disposal?

Reply to  ResourceGuy
April 9, 2021 1:28 pm

Who pays for for dismantling and final disposal of nuclear plants and their heavily contaminated waste?

In Germany, we are prepared for costs around 170 billion €, for only 19 reactors… and that is still an underestimate of what really expects us.

In France, only 30 % of that sum are planned for… 57 reactors.

J.-P. D.

Reply to  Bindidon
April 9, 2021 8:39 pm

For disposal of reactors that are still functional, taken offline for political reasons.

I guess you can say the same for the windmills, but the political reason is lack of subsidies.

Now, why do you need to tear down the reactor containment structures? Just secure in place. But the greens will find a much more expensive and less safe way to do it.

As to the waste, do as the French and reprocess and reuse it.

April 9, 2021 1:07 pm

By “dismantled” did they mean also digging up and busting up the massive concrete foundations?

April 9, 2021 1:22 pm

Charles Rotter can tell us here all what he wants.

I look at how numbers really develop over the years, and not at little peaks and downs in between.

I look at Wikipedia

and at some other sites (government, wind enegy industry, etc).

Here is a small table showing the situation as it is since 2013:

On column 2, BEC is the gross electricity consumption in Germany.

Columns 3-6 show installed power, generated energy, share of gross electricity consumption and the number of installed, active units for onshore; colums 7-10 show the same for offshore.

Here is the net electricity production in Germany for 2020 (i.e. without the respective internal consumption):

In about 3 months, the same stat will be produced for Jan-Jun 2021, and we’ll see how it looks.

To be honest, I don’t feel the need to convince anybody here.

Who doesn’t believe me, doesn’t believe me. So what!

J.-P. D.

Reply to  Bindidon
April 9, 2021 2:39 pm

Griff in a more intellectual mode… 😀

Reply to  Krishna Gans
April 9, 2021 3:43 pm

Tja. Man tut, was man kann.

J.-P. D.

Reply to  Bindidon
April 9, 2021 2:40 pm

Wind is pretty much a non-entity when it comes to energy consumption in Germany

comment image

Last edited 1 year ago by fred250
Reply to  fred250
April 9, 2021 3:42 pm


WUWT’s most aggressive poster is here again, and.. as usual, is completely wrong.

fred250, you should stop your ridiculous ankle biting, and try to think before you write.

One more time, you did not grasp that we are not discussing total primary energy consumption, but… that used in producing electricity.

And whether you want or not, my graph is the correct one, because it shows the ratios of various primary energies used for electricity production:

And I repeat: I’m not interested in small ups and downs, but in continuous information:

J.-P. D.

Reply to  Bindidon
April 9, 2021 4:29 pm

But it doesn’t include all generation nor does it include energy from other countries …… does it? These days it’s hard to glean anything from charts about energy in the EU. It’s like what is done in California and supported by the media. Don’t lie, just leave out the whole truth. Selective reporting.

Reply to  Bindidon
April 9, 2021 5:09 pm

ROFLMAO. Facing REALITY isn’t your strong suit is it..

Holding RUBBISH is what bin-liners are for..

So you think a variable amount of highly erratic wind in the electrical sector, when its only 4% of the total energy use, actually means something

Yes it does.. It means the MOST EXPENSIVE ELECTRICITY in the world.

For CO2 reduction it means NADA..


Wind is just a pittance, a MEASLY 4%, yet still destroying the economy.

Reply to  Bindidon
April 9, 2021 5:25 pm

“we are not discussing total primary energy”

Yep, because the REALITY of total primary energy use shows up the UTTER POINTLESS WASTE OF MONEY on wind turbines

You really can’t cope with that basic idea, can you, muppet waiting for a hand-up.

RUN AWAY from the facts. !!

Hide in your bin.

Reply to  Bindidon
April 9, 2021 2:48 pm

“To be honest, I don’t feel the need to convince anybody here.”

Good think, hey, because you have definitely FAILED, as always.

Back to your job as a bin-liner. !

Reply to  Bindidon
April 10, 2021 10:04 am

“I don’t feel the need to convince anybody here” And yet you keep posting. For someone who keeps saying you don’t care you care an awful lot.

April 9, 2021 1:44 pm

666,666 kWh/ turbine per year.

wind turbines with biblical satanic power!

Reply to  RelPerm
April 9, 2021 4:14 pm


Yeah. Polemic is always simpler than seeking for valuable info.

At the other end of your nice calculation example you see the little Alpha Ventus offshore wind park (only 12 units with today ridiculous 5 MW each).

Since 2010, it continuously produces on average 210 GWh per year, i.e. 17.5 GWh per unit per year. That is a load factor of 0.4. Most energy is produced during fall and winter.

The reason why there is so few of that is that we have a conservative government, and a very powerful electricity production industry.

For now over 10 years, this industry has been fighting with all available political means against high-voltage lines that connect the North Sea with German industry in the south.

Personally I have nothing against highly modern gas plants, but not very surprisingly, the industry shot many of them down years ago, because the stoopid coal is cheaper…

J.-P. D.

Reply to  Bindidon
April 9, 2021 5:10 pm

“seeking for valuable info”

You mean like the FACT that wind only produces a MEASLY 4% of Germany’s energy usage !

Reply to  Bindidon
April 9, 2021 5:14 pm

“it continuously produces…. blah , blah… “

What.. even when the wind wasn’t blowing

You are LYING bin-liner. !!

Let’s see how German wind “suppLIED” in 2015/16

comment image

Percentage of name plate was less than 20% for 60% of the time.

That is NOT continuous.. it is a FARCE. !

Tony Taylor
April 9, 2021 4:10 pm

It’s ironic that South Australia, which was heavily settled by Germans, and Germany, which was even more heavily settled by Germans, have both fallen into the wind power trap. Must be in the genes.
Of course, this doesn’t explain all the other countries and states that have experienced similar problems. Was Texas heavily settled by Germans?

Last edited 1 year ago by Tony Tea
Reply to  Tony Taylor
April 10, 2021 8:42 am

Whats about California ? 😀

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Tony Taylor
April 10, 2021 9:15 am

I think the common denominator is that all these groups of people have been brainwashed by the Western world’s Leftwing Media into believing things that are not true.

Reply to  Tony Taylor
April 11, 2021 12:06 pm

re: “Was Texas heavily settled by Germans?”

Ever heard of Wurstfest?

It’s held yearly in -wait for it- New Braunfels, Texas.

Last edited 1 year ago by _Jim
Chuck no longer in Houston
Reply to  Tony Taylor
April 12, 2021 2:40 pm

Lots of German and Czech settlers.

April 9, 2021 5:37 pm

On top of that there’s this:

U.S.’s Blinken warned Germany’s Maas about Nord Stream 2 sanctions

By Robin Emmott

BRUSSELS (Reuters) – U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on Wednesday he had told his German counterpart that sanctions against the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline were a real possibility and there was “no ambiguity” in American opposition to its construction.Berlin has so far been betting the new U.S. administration of President Joe Biden will take a pragmatic approach to the project to ship Russian gas to Europe because it is almost completed, officials and diplomats have told Reuters. Reiterating Biden’s concerns about the pipeline from Russia to Germany, Blinken said he told German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas on Tuesday in a private meeting that companies involved in the project risked sanctions, particularly at a point when construction might finish. “I made clear that firms engaged in pipeline construction risk U.S. sanctions. The pipeline divides Europe, it exposes Ukraine and central Europe to Russian manipulation and coercion, it goes against Europe’s own stated energy goals,” Blinken told a news conference. The Kremlin says Nord Stream 2, a $11 billion venture led by Russian state energy company Gazprom, is a commercial project, but several U.S. administrations have opposed the project and Europe has vowed to reduce its reliance on Russian energy.

Germany was relying on NordStream 2 for electrons and obtaining an industrial and economic edge, and is happy to sell-out eastern and Nordic European security to get that. Looks like they’ll be getting US Sanctions and European boycotts instead, and that will trigger a collapse in the EU Commission, plus major NATO reforms.

This will also prompt Biden to continue with the plans to redeploy American forces out of Germany to more committed eastern and southern allies in Europe as quickly as possible. Which means Germany will lose that economic support, and will actually have to pay for its own defense from here as well. And Germany will in fact need to be much more concerned about EU strategic security issues. They will actually need to consider what Eastern Europe thinks of Germany because German EU influence and diplomatic cred is headed for a massive downgrade as the amazing mess that Merkel has created, for Germany, and for wider Europe, more fully blooms from here.

Scarce electrons and high prices will just be part of their looming major challenges. The post-cold-war days in the EU lime-light are very much over now.

Virtue-signal that.

Last edited 1 year ago by WXcycles
Reply to  WXcycles
April 9, 2021 9:06 pm

“Scarce electrons and high prices will just be part of their looming major challenges. The post-cold-war days in the EU lime-light are very much over now.”

Nice article on The Marshall Plan, which helped Europe, especially Germany, to become the EU it is today. It was written before the Euro was instituted. The benefits of the Marshall Plan and the defeat of the USSR have run out and now the EU is standing on its own, or not.

Abolition Man
Reply to  WXcycles
April 9, 2021 9:23 pm

Why have the DemoKKKrats been so intent on driving Putin into an alliance with China? The CCP is by far the most dangerous, criminal organization in the world; they must have a lot of dirt on many besides Swalwell!

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Abolition Man
April 10, 2021 9:24 am

There’s not much difference between the criminal enterprise running China and the criminal enterprise running Russia. Both groups are just a bunch of murderous gangsters.

The United States currently has a criminal enterprise running it, too, The Biden Administration/Clinton-Obama Swamp.

The only difference is this criminal enterprise has not gone to the extreme of locking political opponents up or eliminating them outright, yet. They don’t quite have total power yet. God only knows what they would do if they got it. It wouldn’t be pleasant for their political opponents.

Red States would not take it lying down, though.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  WXcycles
April 10, 2021 9:28 am

Putin uses energy as a military weapon. Just ask some of his customers. Germany will end up finding out the hard way, unless they capitulate to Putin’s wishes.

John Solomon has a good book out about Putin and his machinations: “Nuclear Bribes,Russian Spys, and the Washington lies that enriched the Clinton and Biden Dynasities”

April 9, 2021 5:57 pm

€30B would buy a lot of coal fired energy every year….

April 9, 2021 9:53 pm

What would be helpful to understand the implications of what is occurring by not replacing the three (3) turbines, is
1 – What is the national current population of generation.
2 – What is its gross productive output capacity.
3 – What number of units and capacity is already in the pipeline for planting new capacity
4 – What is the replacement policy for all other other regions.

When does the rising curve of production reach a peak and start declining ?

This would be interesting

April 12, 2021 12:51 pm

About 20 years ago I asked the investor relations guy for a large German power company why they were so bullish on wind power. His response:

  • Taxpayers subsidized construction.
  • Retail consumers subsidized maintenance.
  • Capricious winds caused massive swings in spot electricity prices.
  • Industrial supply contracts were priced on spot volatility.
  • industrial demand was highly predictable.
  • Predictable consumption was supplied by burning Lignite (brown coal).

The German mess is like a melon patch – a mix of green on the outside, red on the inside watermelon-activists, and green on the outside, gold on the inside honeydew-crony-capitalists.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights