By P Gosselin on 10. November 2024
At 5 p.m. last Wednesday, Germany’s 1602 offshore wind turbines in the North and Baltic Seas stood still…solar output was also near zero. Germany had to scramble to keep supply going.
The enemy of green energy: the high pressure system
In the words of Professor Claudia Kemfert: It is a myth to believe that solar and wind do not provide enough electricity. The myth that there will be enough wind and sunshine somewhere in Europe was shattered at the beginning of November 2024. Daniel Wetzel describes the situation in the online Die Welt (pay article)
At 5 p.m. on Wednesday, solar power was only supplying a single megawatt hour. The 1602 offshore wind turbines in the North and Baltic Seas – each one the size of the Eiffel Tower – were at a complete standstill. Zero electricity production.
The onshore wind turbines produced only 114 megawatt hours at that hour, with German electricity consumption at 63,000 megawatt hours. Transmission system operator Amprion described the situation on the LinkedIn web portal on Thursday: ‘The minimum feed-in from wind and PV was just around 100 megawatts in total (in the period from 5 p.m. to 9 p.m.).’
This means that the 87,000 megawatts of photovoltaic capacity and around 72,000 megawatts of wind power installed in Germany with triple-digit billion-euro subsidies were virtually unused for hours on end. There was no danger to the power supply, it was said. ‘No sun, no wind – yesterday and today there was a dark doldrums in Germany,’ explained Amprion on Thursday: ‘But our system management had everything under control.’”
Without the fossil power producers and foreign countries, things would have looked bad. A situation that was to be expected – but was consistently smiled away. Instead, graphics of the annual cycle were waved around to show that sun and wind would complement each other perfectly.
The fatal thing about the situation is the prices. Fossil power generation has been made politically more expensive and in times of shortage, prices really go through the roof. Die Welt added:
The peak prices of the past week are possibly just a harbinger of what is to be expected in the coming winter. The expert agency “Montel” quotes energy market experts who expect price peaks of 1000 euros per megawatt hour in the event of further wind lulls. This is because in times of low wind power production, increasingly expensive gas-fired power plants have to step in, which then define the market price level.
Traders interviewed by “Montel” also referred to the German nuclear and coal phase-out, which has reduced the base load-capable power plant capacity that can produce regardless of the weather. The imminent onset of the autumn and winter cold in Europe is also likely to drive up prices. This is because France in particular will then see a sharp increase in its own consumption, as many heating systems in the country are powered by electricity. The surge in demand for electricity in France is likely to further increase the relative shortage on the European Power Exchange and thus drive up prices.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It takes my breath away that the German people let this crap go on. They need to take some action.
Frac now, blame later.
Germany does have some probably frackable sediments, but not on the scale of the US. https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/qa-energy-crisis-reignites-debate-about-fracking-germany Maybe a 20 year supply of natural gas at their current usage rate.
Better than nothing, and better than dubiously reliable natural gas from Russia, the Middle East, North Africa, But not a panacea. Breathing room, not a long term solution.
You’d think that a nation as good at engineerng as the Germans would have a coherent, rational plan for phasing out hydrocarbons/nuclear including development of some practical, not too costly, method for long term (years) storage of excess energy in times of plenty for use during wind/solar “droughts”. Not so apparently
Until Trump gets in and some time passes to get things moving in the production of oil and gas in the US, you can add the US to the dubiously reliable natural gas bucket.
The environmental, safety, health, responsible care, Ben Dovers, and the increased foot dragging on freely agreed to asset retirement obligations, will certainly ensue. But those saved $ will mostly end up in relatively inefficient birth lottery winner, hide away, financial instruments.
Between reduced demand from the upcoming recession, the aging frac fleet, loss of willing frac hands, reduced tier 1 candidate inventory, and petroleum engineers out of new tricks, even the Permian will lose 2024 proved, on, oil and oil associated gas reserves, from what has been booked in 2023. So, more and more D&C distributed, incremental, economic evaluations, will result in project binning, for hurdle rate failure. Then, more accretive M&A’s, with the value coming from run offs.
When your juiciest play is sunsetting, “Drill Baby Drill”, screamed out on Day One, will only make 1 person feel better.
Classic blob word salad.
“rational plan for phasing out hydrocarbons/nuclear”
Why would any sane person want that?
The politicians want it. Which tells us something…
Yep, tells us that politicians are dumb as a box of rocks…
Nuclear because Germany is a relatively small country with a large population and a Fukushima/Chernobyl incident would be devastating. But modern nuclear reactors or SMRs or whatever will be perfectly safe? Maybe, but not the way I’d bet. My cocktail napkin says that the world will need between 10,000 and 20,000 1 Gigawatt reactors to service the energy needs of 8 billion people. Do you really think that bean counters, marketing types, and political appointees won’t/can’t blow one of those up every now and then? Explain to me why that assumption is not every bit as utopian as net zero. I actually (reluctantly) support nuclear power, but that doesn’t mean that those who disagree with me are nuts.
Hydrocarbons because the planet has a very large, but limited supply and I think it not at all improbable that creating more may be a lot harder than most folks around here think. I expect that 8 billion humans can go through a lot of fossil fuels in short order. Maybe only a couple of centuries, I don’t think its at all crazy to husband the resource a bit — at least until we can produce a reasonable replacement at acceptable cost from common raw materials. We have, after all spent 70 years on the simple sounding problem of scaling hydrogen fusion down to a practical energy source and we seem to be 2 or 3 decades away still from the ribbon cutting on the first commercial fusion power plant.
“a Fukushima/Chernobyl incident would be devastating. But modern nuclear reactors or SMRs or whatever will be perfectly safe?”
Demanding that anything be perfectly safe is perfectly silly.
Conflating Fukishima where some poorly sited Gen 2 reactors self destructed but did no damage outside of the plant boundaries with Chernobyl where gen 1 reactors of a type no longer built caused a lot of damage (although not as much as the media claimed at first) is a propaganda move not analysis.h
don k, we are not running out of energy…
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2009/03/20/there-is-no-energy-shortage/
or materials….
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2009/05/08/there-is-no-shortage-of-stuff/
an excertt, there is much much more at the links..”What is Oil?All we have talked about so far is what is named “conventional oil”. There are at least 2 major “unconventional oil” sources that are vastly larger than all of conventional oil. These are the “Tar Sands” (much of which are in Canada) and the “Oil Shale” which covers hugh areas of the United States (along with other parts of the world). The shale is presently not considered an oil reserve of any sort, since nobody can make money off it at present oil prices. Trillions of barrels of oil that exist, but are not counted.
What is a ‘resource’ changes with price and technology.
A resource is something of economic value; it becomes a reserve once folks start using it. Canadian tar sands were not a ‘resource’ 50 years ago, now they are. U.S. oil shale holds a Trillion+ bbl of oil minimum, but is not counted as a resource when prices are below about $100/bbl.
This page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_shale
puts the recoverable shale oil estimate at about 3 trillion barrels. That is about 100 years at present oil consumption rates if all oil consumption was supplied from shale oil. Somehow I don’t feel like I’m running out…
With oil over $100 / bbl the “oil” reserves of the world double or triple…
How much is “ultimately recoverable”? Nobody knows, but it is immense.
This puts us at somewhere around 200 years out before we are really at risk of “running out of oil”… But even this ignores an “oil” source.
Synthetic Oil & “Oil” Products; CTL – Coal To LiquidsCoal can be easily turned to gasoline and Diesel (as done by SASOL in Africa, or Rentech, Syntroleum, and Synthesis Energy Company in the U.S.A.) or into “petro” chemicals as is done by Eastman Chemical company (ticker EMN) today.
See: The SASOL site for more.
And they are not the only ones doing this. The process was invented in Germany prior to the Nazi era by FIscher and Tropsch so it is commonly called FT technology. During WWII, the Nazi war machine ran on FT fuels.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer-Tropsch
During the Arab Oil Embargo of the 1970’s, South Africa was threatened with a cut off of fuel from the west. They dug out their history books and SASOL was born. They have been running a modern economy on synthetic oil ever since.
Their economy has benefited from the stable energy costs and foreign exchange retention (i.e. not sending gold to OPEC). They are the most industrially advanced economy in Africa. They are an existence proof that this technology is all that is needed to provide all the “petroleum” fuel products we need, even if we don’t have enough “petroleum”.
All you need to do to make synthetic crude oil is take any material that contains a hydrocarbon component (plastic, paper, biowaste, coal, tree chips, garbage, slaughter house waste) put it in a pressure vessel and cook at high temperature with a little water, and pressure (500 degrees Fahrenheit and pressurized to 600 pounds per square inch, for about 20 minutes). Out comes a synthetic crude comparable to a high quality crude oil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_depolymerization
http://discovermagazine.com/2006/apr/anything-oil
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/pdfs/agricultural_waste.pdf
There is a new microwave process that is also being worked on to do the same thing.
Basically, we run out of “Oil Products” long after we run out of oil, since we can use coal or any other carbon source.
And the US is the “Saudi Arabia of coal.”
Indeed. There is no “rational plan for phasing out hydrocarbons/nuclear”
donk, what would such a plan look like?
There are only IRRATIONAL plans to phase out hydrocarbons.
20 years of natural gas would give them a good bridge to the next source of reliable energy, probably nukes of some type. But as you said, there seems to be no rational, national effort to meet a transition goal. Points towards social unrest and more chaos.
Maybe that’s what they really want…
Fracking bans are crazy, both practically and politically. If you just make sure that it is not indirectly subsidized with environmental, safety, health, and responsible care Ben Dovers, and that cash is lock boxed in front for real world asset retirement costs, most of it goes away. Those give away’s paid for much of the past US activity, now fading as tier 1 acreage gets drained. And FYI, Day One will pass, with 47 screaming Drill Baby Drill, to himself.
Frac gas in Saudi. They have the rock, the low cost serfs from other lands, and the money. They will work on the needed water. If their sand is not round enough or strong enough, they have the engineering expertise to redesign stims to use what they have. They can use the gas for summer AC, bringing more oil on the market to be burned more efficiently elsewhere.
Storage is pure fantasy. They need to (re)build nuclear and coal for baseload, and frack that gas for response to demand variability.
They built nearly double their PEAK demand of 80GW in wind and solar (150GW) and actually get *less than 30%* of their annual electricity consumed from all that crap, which will soon need replacements. Not to mention times like this where the worse-than-useless wind and solar produce next to NOTHING.
The lessons should have penetrated the skulls of even the most stubborn Germans by now. Stop subsidizing what doesn’t work and build what works.
After nearly 80 years of de-****fication? Good luck with that. WW1 was financial WW2 was psychological.
Barely lasted 6 months after FRG was established and took over instead of the military occupation in western zones.
DNF was a preoccupation of the allies not the government nor the people 8n FRG
The crap that went on was the Nordstream II gas pipeline being blown up by terrorists. Remind me again, Bob, who blew that up, because it wasn’t Germans and it wasn’t Russians?
The Gernans like to pretend it was Ukrainians operating from a tiny yacht.
The Ukrainians did it for obvious reasons.The Wall Street Journal even named the ship that was chartered.
And no, Russia did not destroy its own strategic asset. You don’t destroy your own strategic, economic assets to drum up support.
Just curious if you think the Ukrainians did it on their own or if they had any help? And if so, who do you think helped them to blow up the pipeline?
They have been doing some amazing other military exploits in Russia and occupied Crimea….bloweing the pipelines was child’s play for Ukraine’s 8ntell service
You don’t get 4x400kg of C4 explosives plus diving kit (including decompression chambers) on a 50ft yacht like the Andromeda.
Russia probably did not destroy its own strategic asset–most Russians are too smart for that.
But that probably doesn’t apply to Germany, which tried to destroy its coal and nuclear power supply, which powers its industrial base, which dominated Europe in the 1980’s.
Soon-to-be-ex-President Biden also destroyed strategic assets by cancelling the Keystone XL pipeline and stopping exports of liquefied natural gas, which could have been used to supply Europe if Russia cut off the supply due to the war in Ukraine.
For Germany, the USA, and the UK, energy strategy amounted to Ready, Aim (at foot), Fire!
In the USA, people with at least half a brain are eagerly awaiting January 20, 2025.
The Russians might have done a strategic amount of damage to the asset. Remember, they were trying to twist Germany’s arm into supporting them over Ukraine – and the Germans were doing things like preventing overflight for aircraft supplying arms to Ukraine. They had already shut gas supply via Poland, substantially reduced supply via the Austrian Baumgarten hub, and progressively reduced supply via Nordstream, finally halting it altogether a few weeks before the attack. But the Germans were already buckling to pressure from elsewhere, and the tactics didn’t work – sufficient alternative supply was found to stock up ahead of winter. If the Germans weren’t going to depend on Nordstream it was no longer a strategic asset at least until a harsh winter strained the supply system again.
No entity outside Russia gained anything from the pipeline bombing. When an asset is returning zero on investment (due to sanctions), insurance fraud is not out of the question. Using it as justification for the attack on Ukraine is a good side bonus.
“It takes my breath away that the German people let this crap go on.”
And you can expect this to happen at least one day a month when the EU reaches NET ZERO.
They have become complacent in their ability to do everything efficiently. Their heads are in the sand with this.
I was thinking of a particular orifice for their head placement on energy…
Nut Zero at last..
When will they ever learn!!
You left off the quotation marks for this song lyric phrase and the attribution to Peter, Paul and Mary. You must be a really older guy like
me. I’m 80 years old.
Ahem … Attribution probably should be Pete Seeger who wrote it (in 1955) and Joe Hickerson who modified it into the familiar version. Also, I, being older than you, associate the song with Kingston Trio who made the Billboard charts with their recording in 1961 rather than Peter, Paul and Mary (1962).
I did a search with Bing and first got PPM, but I did not scroll all through all the results. Upon a second check I found that many artist have recorded the song.
Paging Nick Stokes, paging Nick Stokes!
Yes. Also need Nick’s comments on the ongoing calm and consequent fall in generation in the UK. Picked up a bit today, but its lasted a good week now, and if the forecasts are correct, more to come in the early part of this week.
The other thing one would like to hear from Nick on is, why are UK power prices so much higher than anywhere else? Why isn’t all the wind and solar lowering them?
Wind and sun are free … or so many greens believe. Now, how are the utilities going to pay-off the bonds used to finance the windmills and solar panels?
Lesson learned, I hope.
Don’t worry. Labour have a fully costed plan to reduce energy costs. Keir said so, so it must be true. They lost it down the back of the sofa but as soon as they find it all will be OK.
Nick has been… blown away.
Nick, just don’t get your pager from the Middle East! 🙂
Who could possibly have foreseen a dunkelflaute? Calling all greens.
The Greens once said, Dunkelflaute doesn’t exist, they have calculated that.
:facepalm:
Then it must have been made more likely by climate change 😀
Yeah because less wind is caused by climate change…I mean more wind is caused by climate change…😆😅🤣😂
Yeah, nobody saw this coming, did they. Except the skeptics.
The even bigger problem is the leadership still doesn’t recognize the problem and are continuing down this ruinous Net Zero path.
What’s the definition of insanity again?
I can’t wait to see how the state government here in Wokeachusetts deals with a Trump smash down of green energy, what with their net zero law. The state is going to be dependent on wind turbines at sea- since nobody wants large scale wind and solar “farms” on land anymore. I’ll have to start reading the Bah-stin Globe again.
They’ll do what almost everybody else with net-zero mandates does. They’ll wait until the last possible minute, blame Big Oil for the failure, Lament that we’re all going to die (the one thing they surely have right even if they have the causation wrong) and extend the deadline. A very few places with small populations, lots of hydro, and good geothermal resources (e.g. Iceland) may actually achieve net zero (if you ignore the massive amounts of fuel consumed by aircraft flying in and out of Keflavik airport).
As far as I can see, net zero deadlines can probably be extended every decade or two — as necessary — for all eternity or until all the planet’s hydrocarbons have been consumed — which will happen considerably sooner.
Trump should cut all subsidies and mandates for wind and solar. That will instantly end their pointless construction.
I’m on the email list of the state’s EEA (energy and environment agency). They’re in panic mode. Just got the following email from them.
It Germany were Lithuania, nobody would give a damn, but Germany is the 800- lb gorilla in Europe, so any screwups in Germany screw up all of Europe.
Germany should be placed under international, not European/Brussels, control, because it is danger to Europe.
Not “skeptics” – “realists”.
Herr Heibeck, who studied philosophy, soon unemployed, will solve the no wind and no sunshine situation in Germany during his ample free time.
Eistein and other real scientists tried, but declared it impossible
What they haven’t mentioned is that, despite fog and zero winds, this particular air mass has been relatively mild in temperature. Nights haven’t been below plus 5 Celsius, in my neck of the woods at least. But now think of the same weather pattern happening in February, with an air mass that has come down from the pole, then passed over Russia to Germany and points west. Night lows can easily be minus 10 or below.
The only sane things to do are to ditch “nett zero” entirely, to put in place some sane and sensible energy policies, and to bring to justice those responsible for all the green fiascos.
“this particular air mass has been relatively mild in temperature. Nights haven’t been below plus 5 Celsius, in my neck of the woods at least”
Not for long..
next week heavy snow in the alps.
Frost is here end of week
Oh, absolutely fantastic! Almost the first time some journalist uses actual units of energy delivered, instead of power, they use it in the completely wrong way!
I give up with all journalists.
Sorry! Reiterated your observation in a new comment 😉
1 Mega Watt-hour = 3,600 Mega Joules
Of course there is a reason for it.. for wind and solar you have that so called “installed power”, typically a very impressive number.. and often quite unrelated to the actually generated electric energy..
It appears that the North Sea is about the only place in all of Europe with a little bit of wind.
Well, if they only had the foresight to build off-shore wind there, and everywhere else, then this wouldn’t be a problem. Just blanket Europe with wind farms. The wind has to be blowing somewhere.
/sarc
While the rest of europe has this pressure system we in spain get all the depressions and the DANAS. Damn climate change.
I just love the sound of reality biting. Stay tuned, more to come!
1) Buy Bitcoin
2) Quit Your Job
3) Go on Welfare
4) Pay No Taxes
I don’t understand why people are still motivated to go to work each day. The good news is that soon hundred of thousands will be on welfare.
1: done. And post election its shot up!
The Greenie Germans are learning the hard way that FF are always reliable and will keep them from freezing to death in the dark.
Learning ???? 😀
Maybe he’s an optimist.
Germany’s leaders haven’t learned anything.
This ought to be a wake-up call, but it’s not. They can’t or won’t see the train wreck that is on their doorstep.
They prefer to install more windmills for catching more non existing wind. 😀
Remind me again: who was it who destroyed Nordstream II, the long term gas supplies Germany agreed to procure from Russia?
It was certainly terrorists, but which terrorists was it?
Hint: they weren’t German and they weren’t Russian.
Ukraine,
Is there not plenty of evidence the US statists were involved?
Without the fossil power producers and foreign countries, things would have looked bad.
Just you wait and see skeptic when them thar foreign countries go net-zero too casting off the shackles of Big Fossil.
Story Tip…not a nice one
https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/breaking-news/person-feared-dead-in-wind-farm-incident-in-victorias-west/news-story/fa03b3d582f8a688318d74a1e1563c3c
And the ridiculous lie touted:
Never challenged. Never investgated. Never retracted.
It’s 5% or less
https://www.energy.gov.au/energy-data/australian-energy-statistics/energy-production
Never let a good tragedy go past without spreading some completely fabricated propaganda!
They consistently say “energy” when they mean “electricity”.
From the “electricity” tab of your link….
Yet another article making the same totally obvious point – when there is no wind or sun, there is no output from wind and solar generation, something even a primary school child would understand. And yet the net zero obsessed plunge ever onward to disaster, seemingly no rational argument can stop them.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/11/10/britain-wind-power-fall-zero-miliband-prepare-cut-gas-use/
I have long said, and still believe, that unfortunately only the breaking of the crisis will force a change of direction.
Good way for America to get rid of economic competitors- tell them to go green!
It worked for China.
I wish folks who are unaware of the difference between power and energy just kept their ignorant opinions to themselves.
I refer to the quoted author’s (Wetzel) reference to “megawatt-hour”. Instantaneous generation RATE units are megawatts. Doesn’t require more than 8th-grade numeracy.
I stop reading when I come across this error. Don’t finish much reading on this subject.
MAYBE the source for the generation data integrates over successive time periods, but that’s calculus!
Calculus? Calculus?
But that’s mafematix!
(which I did aged 14, but no journalist seems to have ever done!)
And we all know that math is racist.
Thank you. I was wondering when someone would note that.
How do we recharge our fictitious battery technology in Dunkelflaute? Two hours of battery and then wait for the weather to break?
Diesel generators.
Better yet, just don’t build wind, solar or batteries, and build coal, nuclear and gas power plants instead.
A spokesman said: ‘While weather patterns can influence wind generation, the impact on energy prices is mitigated by the diverse energy sources and strategic planning NESO has in place.’
A Government spokesman said: ‘Our robust electricity system is already set up to cope with extreme scenarios.
Wind power grinds to virtual standstill after ‘anticyclonic gloom’
It turns out they meant extra wind farms and batteries. Doh!
Can we get over the myth that it’s costly gas generation that causes sky high prices? They are determined by the price at which primarily industrial demand switches off during a shortage.
Generators including charged up batteries who anticipate a shortage may decide to play chicken in the balancing markets by offering high prices for uncommitted volumes kept in reserve. Price too high, and demand cuts back and they don’t make the sale. Offers are pitched around what they think marginal demand will pay.
The other source of demand is renewables generators buying cover for sales they made that they will be unable to fulfill. They tend to try to buy back these positions ahead of gate closure and balancing mechanism prices because there are more generators to buy from, increasing competition from those unwilling to risk the balancing market game of chicken.
Well it is true gas generators often set the high marginal price as insurer of last resort but that price is necessarily higher to cover its capital cost sitting around idle while fickles get away with dumping. The climate changers like to gaslight consumers about that with their ‘fickles are cheaper’ BS but a level playing field would immediately expose their lie. ie- suppliers of electrons to the communal grid can only supply those they can reasonably guarantee 24/7/365 along with FCAS or keep them.
GB has a capacity market that pays for plant to be available. What they make from actually operating is quite separate. A 1GW plant can now expect £70m p.a. just for being on call. So the costs of sitting idle are already covered: there is no need ERCOT style to try to make all the money when the plant is dispatched.
Peaker plant tends to be much less efficient (e.g. open cycle gas turbine or diesel), and so the fuel cost is higher than for CCGT. But that in no way explains truly high prices when there are shortage risks. For that, please read my explanation.
Great timing on the fog. Germany’s 3-party coalition anti-nuclear, pro-wind and solar government has collapsed and the timing for the no confidence vote is going on right now. Germany’s fetish for wind and solar has nearly destroyed their economy and voters are finally connecting the dots. A nice little brownout would be great, it might help bring about the needed end to their energiewende before winter hits and save Germany from themselves..
The MSM never tells you about periods that have no renewable energy but seem to spout how renewable energy provided 100% of the energy but leave out for what time span and when.
Sadly the only way this nonsense is stopped is when a great number of people suffer or die.
Over German 30,000 onshore wind turbines were not doing well during this ‘dunkelflaute’ either. These conditions are common in Europe and there is no help from wind fleets elsewhere either. Ten years of Merra data showed that over 67% correlation of wind speed exists over the entire northern hemisphere Westerly wind belt. That means that no wind in Germany correlates closely with no wind in the northern hemisphere. Plotting wind power data from various European countries reveals the near perfect correlation.
Similarly, PV and wind are not found to be mutually supporting.
The arrogance of German and most western European political groups arises from invincible ignorance. These regions declare NO fracking with no time limit although hydrocarbon rich shales are all over Europe, since Net Zero 2050 will soon eliminate the need for fossil fuels.
German and other EU politicians apparently also believe there are energy resources free of risk. The data tell us, including renewable energy resources, that nuclear is the safest energy resource of all – that is the uniform conclusion of Swiss, EU, Forbes (US), and Russian studies.
Those people usually cannot agree even on the weather!
There is, however, one important result of the disregard for reality: A Brain Drain is ahead- not into Western Europe, but into Central and Eastern Europe where economies will flourish, having fossil fuel energy, while the proud, but imploding, Western Europe countries flounder.
What was the point in posting everything you do in BOLD?
Pairwise cross-correlation of daily wind output across European countries
https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/6yqhP/2/
Just to add some graphical perspective, Germany has 61GW of onshore and 8GW offshore wind (Thank, Grok). In the last three weeks offshore wind has hit zero or near zero several times. And, onshore wind has scrapped the bottom during this time. Germany is doubling down on offshore wind. Only the phrase, “Stark, raving mad” describes this effort.