Another wind drought has led to soaring electricity prices across Europe. Norway, which exports power to its European neighbors, has seen enough.
Robert Bryce

Source: Alexander Stahel on X.
For the second time in a month, Germany’s electric grid has been hit by a wind drought, known in German as a Dunkelflaute. The lack of wind sent Europe’s electricity prices soaring to their highest levels since the end of 2022, when Europe was in the midst of an energy crisis due to concerns about supplies of Russian gas. That’s saying something since Europe — and Germany in particular — now appears to be amid a permanent energy crisis.
Yesterday, German consumers paid an average of $400 per megawatt-hour for electricity. During peak times, prices in Germany’s wholesale power market came close to $1,000 per MWh, the highest level in 18 years. Here’s how a reporter with Spain’s El Pais newspaper explained the situation:
Dunkelflaute is a cursed word in the German electricity sector. The combination, typical of cold anticyclones, of low temperatures (which increase demand) and the almost total absence of wind (which hinders wind generation) configures one of the worst possible scenarios for the price of electricity: it forces the burning of more gas in combined cycle plants, which are much more expensive, and that substantially increases the bill…The main factor behind this escalation is the lack of wind. While at this time of year Germany’s powerful wind power sector (onshore and offshore) usually averages almost 20 gigawatts (GW) of power, according to data from the specialist portal Montel, thus becoming the country’s main source of electricity, on Wednesday it will just exceed 3 GW. With the cloudy skies, solar photovoltaic power is also operating well below its potential and forces combined cycle plants — in which gas is burned to obtain electricity — to operate at a higher rate than usual, driving up prices.
The wind drought isn’t just hitting Germany. As shown in the graphic at the top of this article, electricity prices across Europe soared amid the wind drought. In response, Norwegian politicians are promising to dismantle the undersea power cables that connect Norway’s grid to mainland Europe to protect Norwegians from Europe’s tumultuous electricity market. Electricity prices in Norway, which gets 90% of its power from hydro, hit record prices this week despite having full hydro reservoirs.
This article is free. To get all new posts and comment on articles, please consider becoming a paid subscriber.
According to the X account of Visegrád 24, a Norwegian news outlet, the two links that connect Norway to Europe will reach their technical lifetimes in 2026 and 2027. The two cables have 9 GW of exchange capacity, of which 5.1 GW connects to Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, and the UK. The outlet quoted Norway’s energy minister as saying, “It’s a shitty situation.”
Visegrád 24 also quoted Sweden’s deputy prime minister and energy minister, Ebba Busch, as being “furious with the Germans.” The article continued, explaining that due to Germany’s decision to shutter its nuclear plants, “people in southern Sweden and southern Norway now have [to] pay $5 for a 10-minute shower.”

As seen above, Germany’s wind energy production collapsed three times this week. During each wind lull, the shortfall was made up by gas-fired generation. As I explained last month, during the first Dunkelflaute of the year:
The latest wind drought provides more evidence of the foolishness of Germany’s Energiewende, an insanely expensive effort designed to force the country off of hydrocarbons and onto alt-energy. In September, a study published in the International Journal of Sustainable Energy estimated that between 2002 and 2022, the Energiewende cost Germany $746 billion. Of that sum, more than half was spent on alt-energy production and distribution. The remainder was spent on subsidies. If Germany had spent about half that sum on nuclear energy, it would have achieved greater emissions reductions than it did by chasing the mirage of alt-energy.
Things may be bad, but don’t ever underestimate Germany’s ability to make things even worse.
As I wrote in “Germany Is Dunkelf**ked,” the German government plans to provide an additional $17 billion in subsidies for Germany’s wind sector. Those new payments will be added to existing alt-energy subsidies, which the University of Cologne estimates will cost $19.3 billion in 2025.
Furthermore, on Wednesday, Bloomberg reported that the German government has “dropped plans for a major expansion of gas-fired power plants because of an absence of political support.” The country was aiming to add 5 GW of new capacity in 2025 and another 5 GW by 2028, but the deal couldn’t move forward due to last month’s collapse of the coalition government.
A final note: This morning, I talked to a US energy industry veteran who is currently in Berlin attending an energy conference. I asked about the sentiment in Germany amid the Dunkelflaute. The veteran told me it was so cold in Berlin that he bought an extra hat to stay warm. “It’s super cold, and there’s no wind and no sun.” As for the sentiment at the energy conference, he told me, “German industry is fleeing.”
Media hits
I was recently on the Americano podcast with The Spectator’s Freddy Gray. We talked at length about Chris Wright, energy humanism, and US energy policy. You can listen to that podcast here.
A few days ago, I was on Australia’s ADH TV talking to my friend Gerard Holland about the recent US election and what might happen under the Trump administration. You can watch that episode here.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Trump has been right all along
Get rid of wind, solar, batteries, heat pumps, EVs, etc.
All are a sure way to poverty, debt, and industrial stagnation/regression, as Europe has been demonstrating for years.
After 35 years of subsidies, the results are no gain and lots of pain
When will these woke non-STEM idiots ever learn
Vote them out
They do not belong in government
US Energy Consumption in 2023
Over 77.1 quad (82.4%) came from fossil fuels and 8.1 % (8.7%) from nuclear fuels
After 35 years and several hundred $billion of subsidies, only 8.2 quad (8.8%) came from renewables, such as:
1) wind,
2) pre-existing and new hydro,
3) pre-existing and new bio (mostly tree burning),
4) solar
1 quad = 10^15 Btu
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/visualized-u-s-energy-use-by-source-and-sector-total-consumption
.
World Energy Consumption in 2023
According to the Energy Institute’s 2023 Statistical Review of World Energy, world primary energy consumption was 620 Exajoules (EJ) in 2023. Breakdown by sector:
Fossil Fuels: 505 EJ (81.5%), of which
Oil: 196 EJ (up 2.5%)
Coal: 164 EJ (up 1.6%)
Natural Gas: 144 EJ (flat)
Renewables (including pre-existing and new bio, but excluding pre-existing and new hydro): About 8% of the total energy mix
1 EJ = 0.94781707774915 x 10^15 Btu, slightly less than a quad
https://www.energyinst.org/statistical-review.
The photo reminds me of Long Island Sound, where I raced a sailboat for 30 years
We very often there was NO WIND, because New York City is a huge heat island that blocks the pre-vailing western winds.
The winds go around the heat island dome.
The northern part is useless for sailing and the southern part is much weakened, because sandy/built-up Long Island is a heat Island.
Back in the late 60’s I also sailed in Long Island Sounds, mostly from Old Saybrook to Napatree Point, occasionally to Fishers or Block Island.
It was a wooden 27ft Saybrook Sailorette 7ft beam and 37ft mast with 400 lb iron keel, onboard Volvo marine engine. Designed to catch the high winds in the Sound.
The only real problem I experienced was standing on the bow furling a Genoa Gib while heading into a West wind while a tanker past in front of us.
The swells were over my head.
You were less affected by wind lulls
I sailed out of Cedar Point Yacht Club, Westport, CT, with an Atlantic and a J-30, from 1960 to 1990,
Heat pumps are fine in a lot of places. They cost less to run in my pay house than propane and way less than baseboard electric.
South Australia should have given them second thoughts. Texas in 2021 should have made them reverse course. But Their Holy Cause is Sacred, and no doubts are to be entertained.
Perhaps they should attach spindles to the front of the turbine blades and run belts down to a series of Human Hamster Wheels so XR and JSO detainees can manually turn the generators and produce their “Cheap” power for their utopic world.
As a child, I had a Holiday incense holder from Germany that was shaped as a Christmas tree, and it had a hole in its top through which smoke and hot air rose. This air movement caused a fan blade to turn.
We had one as well. One of my siblings put a “too big” candle in it and the fan blades caught on fire. Added some excitement to our Christmas as I remember.
It is exceedingly hard to feel sorry for the Germans, as for the rest of Europe being forced to prop up Germany, get the hell out of the agreement.
The rest of Europe depends on the German economic engine. The collapse of the German economy will be huge, but this time the Germans won’t fight because, global warming!
At the rate Germany is going it won’t be long before they are no more consequential than Luxembourg.
Wonder if anything changes after Feb ?
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg36pp6dpyo
snap election ….
Would love to see the prices in the UK and other omitted places on your map
It’s enough just to see that electricity in France is a whopping €275 for Peter Dutton’s nuclear idea to be dead in the water. Prices are super-cheap in the countries with lots of wind and solar, eg. Denmark and Germany €936. Anthony Albanese must be rubbing his hands with glee at the prospect of fighting an election campaign based on nuclear energy. All he has to do is to conceal the numbers for the whole campaign. Or maybe he won’t bother to do that, on the basis that the numbers are incomprehensible anyway (well, they are to him).
Another commenter who does not understand the market. Look up “merit order” and “price setting” then the influence of constraints on that..
If the power cost in France is too high, what about all the times in Australia when it reached the cap at $16k because the renewables couldn’t deliver?
Can’t tell if you are being sarcastic. Prices are super expensive in countries with lots of wind and solar. France has lots of nuclear and is cheaper than the rest.
However, nuclear takes a lot of time and permitting so there won’t be a fast ramp up. Germany could turn back on its nuclear which would help. They already turned back on dirty coal
Jimmy,
What on Earth is left to permit?
Can over-regulation find a miracle, a new way to delay nuclear for several years?
It is tragic that delaying moves with all the depth of games for children are taken seriously by planners. Geoff S
“…over-regulation…”
____________________________________________________
“We got so good at stopping projects that we forgot how to build
things in America.” John Podesta, Biden’s Clean energy advisor.
I’m no engineer or scientist- but I bet if God told the Germans to build 20 nuclear reactors in the next year or he’d destroy the planet- they’d do it- and do it well. They sure built those LNG facilities in a hurry.
Actually, the hard part of building an LNG revaporizing facility is building the docks for the ships fast enough.
More like France is making a killing selling to the Germans to meet their shortfall
I guess the red thumbs didn’t read your comment carefully. 😉
Perhaps your sarcasm was a bit too subtle. 😉
Poe’s Law ignored. 🤭
https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/energy-price-cap
There is a price cap that the government sets, but the cost is
Buying energy for customers (wholesale costs) £736 now, £755 next year. £19 change
https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/energy-price-cap
It’s amazing how they manage to blame gas for the high prices. Part of that high price is gas being turned off when the wind is blowing. If they just disconnected all the wind turbines and used every fuel they’ve got (coal, nuclear, gas), I wonder how much lower prices would be.
Yes, the Spanish author did imply that using natural gas power plants was the cause of the increase in the price of electricity.
The real cause is Germany is paying for TWO electrical systems: The windmills and solar and the natural gas as backup. The Germans have to have enough natural gas backup to fill in when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine, so in effect, Germany is paying for two separate generating plans.
If Germany were to scrap the windmills and solar, and depend on natural gas for their electricity, their electricity prices would go down.
That’s the problem with windmills and solar: You have to have enough conventional generation on standby to make up for any shortfalls from wind and solar. If you have enough natural gas backup to make up for wind and solar shortfall, then why use wind and solar at all?
An unwarranted fear of CO2 is driving Germany into the ground.
President Trump said the other day that any company that moves to the United States and does its business from here will only be charged 15 percent on taxes. I bet a lot of companies are headed this way. Maybe a lot of German companies.
German politicians better wake up soon. The same goes for UK politicians. Don’t be the crash-test dummies for wind and solar.
“Don’t be the crash-test dummies for wind and solar.”
Nice!
Why make companies pay taxes? The more they pay in taxes the less they can invest in growing the company. It is like the more income tax you pay the less you can consume and save.
Hence the reason why cutting rates has always resulted in an increase in economic activity.
A little lesson that completely passed our [UK] Rachel from Accounts, who has made it much more expensive to employ people from April ’25.
Result – the economy of the UK has contracted [very slightly].
Wait until the tax actually hits.
Note that the proclaimed mission of the [new-ish] Labour Government was to expand the economy – ‘growth, growth, growth’ vibe …
They’re pollies.
|If their mouth is open, they’re lying.
Auto
ou could always use batteries. (Is a /sarc really necessary?)
Note Finland has nuclear power
And a fourth of its energy comes from woody biomass! Home grown and renewable. Their forestry sector is so advanced- some years ago a sawmill owner told me that he and many other mill owners took a trip to Finland and blew their minds seeing how advanced the Finns were in their forestry and wood processing industries. Meanwhile, American forestry is dying because the tree huggers hate forestry.
https://mmm.fi/en/en/forests/use-of-wood/wood-based-energy
Tree huggers love forest fires.
Just for scale, there are ~5.6 mln people in Finland.
A possible minor error in the quote from the El Pais article, but are combined cycle gas plants driving the price of electricity, or is it perhaps open cycle plants being used as base load that are the real culprit?
CHP is the most efficient, cheapest
After a short Google search:
Combined heat and power (CHP), produces electricity and thermal energy at the
same time used to heat individual buildings, factories, and municipal facilities.
Pricing reflects the marginal units. I suspect that absent significant dispatch from Germany’s ‘baseload’ renewables, they’re well beyond their combined cycle gas capacity and into their more expensive peaking units.
So much for E-Trons then-
Audi Takes ‘Painful’ Decision to Close a Factory
“In response, Norwegian politicians are promising to dismantle the undersea power cables that connect Norway’s grid to mainland Europe to protect Norwegians from Europe’s tumultuous electricity market.”
They won’t, though. Those are prices that are paid by other countries to Norway, which does very well out of them. They can well afford to subsidise their own customers, as I’m sure they do, and still do very well.
The source of those numbers is dubious (from someone on X) and poorly specified – I presume that are daily peak spot prices. They don’t make much sense – look at adjacent regions in Sweden differing by a factor of about 100. Differences in Norway are large too.
Why would anyone stop the means of exporting their abundant and cheap produce?
Not renewing the undersea cables is a silly idea.
Why not ask Rachel Reeves? She’s an expert in deindustrialising the economy
Rachel Reeves has been Chancellor for 6 months. She has not destroyed major industries, caused double digit inflation or put 3 million on the dole.
I think you meant Margaret Thatcher.
That’s six months too long.
Yes. It is silly to hear Norwegian politicians speaking unkindly of the Germans paying their country such high prices, but I guess that is politics.
Those high prices also push prices up in Southern Norway and Sweden.
Germany’s reliance destabilises their grid, and makes it more expensive to control.
Also creates a supply/demand issue, so prices go up.
Why are you such a complete moron when it comes to understanding energy supply ?
Germany had to import 20GW, while the inteconnectors are only able to 26GW import.
Norway has 3 links to Denmark and 1 each to Holland, Germany and the UK and its total hydro capacity is greater than the rest of Europe together. The capacity is mainly in the North and also serves the South of the country
However, I have a note of Paul Frederick Bach saying in a paper(2022 I think) that these links had “challenged even this capacity over 2019-22”
Sorry no link.
I’m sure they have. They will build more.
That’s assuming Norway doesn’t have their share of NIMBY’s. I don’t blame the Norwegians for being pissed off about Germany dismantling their nuclear generation to keep their Green Party happy.
No, they are not stupid. They don’t want to get their electricity network and generating capacity involved in what they can see is a German and EU train wreck. They can see it coming, and they can see the political price that it will exact if they take no precautions.
They are stupid alright. All the established political parties are pro ACER and pro transfer cables. Not one sees the train wreck that is happening in front of their eyes – they are all happy sacrificing everything to the Green Madness.
You’re missing the point, as so often. The question is whether it is possible at all, and if so at what price, to run a country on the intermittent electricity supply provided by wind and solar.
The head article summarized some of the evidence on the price, and there is a similar story from the UK, periodic soaring prices (coupled of course shortly afterwards with huge constraint payments).
But the question is, if you think its possible, just write down, for the UK as an example, what it would take to do it. How much:
You have to provide for peak demand of, lets say, 50GW, and you have to provide for periods of a week or more when solar produces virtually nothing and wind delivers at 10% or less of faceplate, often below 5%. You should not assume any imports from Europe, because the calms will mostly be Europe-wide. You should also not assume any nuclear, because that will be offline in a couple of years.
Just answer the question, or admit it cannot be done.
Michel unfortunately you’re flogging a dead horse here. Nick is never going to do as you ask because he knows it will destroy his arguments and his irrational belief in unreliables.
Isn’t it absolutely weird, politicians and their advisers and the climate lobby all trying to persuade is (and often forcing us) to switch from generating technologies which have been proven to work to ones which have not, at least not on the scale and in the application they advocate.
And yet, when you just ask them a basic question such as how much wind they propose installing and how are they going to deal with calms, you cannot get an answer.
You see it in the UK in spades. Miliband is proposing to have 90GW of wind, and I think in the latest proposal 70GW of solar. In pursuit of the 95% net zero by 2030. It cannot possibly work. At 4pm in December or January in the middle of a calm there will be 5-10GW of wind, and no solar, to supply demand of 50GW+.
Just tell us all, how is this going to work? Where is the power going to come from? Or what are you going to do when it fails?
And there is total silence whenever you ask, and then they pop up again saying exactly the same thing, wind and solar. Oh, and trivial amounts of storage.
Its really dangerous, but its also really wrong, just messing with peoples lives on the basis of personal obsessions.
There is a good thread on this topic at Not A Lot Of People Know That with many interesting responses.
I’ll just quote a small part of one from Prof Gordon Hughes
“All over Europe there is huge unhappiness about swings in market conditions – from negative to very high prices – due to the instability of German wind and solar output”
They do until new infrastructure must be built to supply the demand. I seriously doubt the high spot prices they receive will fully cover the cost of new infrastructure on a permanent basis without raising the prices to Norway citizens. Robbing Peter to pay Paul only works until Peter goes broke!
Everyone here tells me that Europe prices will be high. Norway can generate cheaply. There is money to be made there.
You haven’t explained the paradox of the seller complaining of high prices.
Poor Thick-Nick.. zero comprehension as always.
It is because the facilities generating the electricity also pass those high prices onto southern Sweden and Norway.
The people do not like that, so it becomes very awkward politically as well as being very disruptive to the stability of their own electricity supply.
This is what perplexity says:
This move reflects Norway’s desire to prioritize its domestic energy needs and shield its consumers from the instability in the European energy market, particularly those caused by Germany’s energy transition challenges.
“It’s a shitty situation.” There we are, back to methane again.
Sounds like perplexity has been reading mainly Bryce. A lot is word for word the same.
Still no explanation of why the seller (Norway) would object to high export prices. Sounds like pre-election talk by the Labour government. They can shield their own folk from the high export price if they want to.
Well, Sweden has abundant Hydro (41%) and Nuclear (30%) which are cheap compared to Wind (19% of mix) or Solar (?2%). Sweden hasn’t installed that much Expensive Wind and/or Solar to drive up their prices.
Nick,
I lived in Norway for three years.
About 90% is from reservoir hydro (the system can provide 100% of Norway’s needs) and 10% from wind turbines on the windy west coast, which have been put up for feel-good reasons.
Everything is very expensive in Norway; a $60,000 Audie costs $110,000 in Norway, due to various taxes and fees
The average household income is about $125,000/y vs US at about $70,000/y
Any comparisons should be on a PPP basis
Electricity consumer prices, including fees, VAT taxes and various BS charges, are about 25 c/kWh in the south, much less in the north
Here is more feel-good wind in Norway
Floating Offshore Wind in Norway
Equinor, a Norwegian company, put in operation, 11 Hywind, floating offshore wind turbines, each 8 MW, for a total of 88 MW, in the North Sea. The wind turbines are supplied by Siemens, a German company
.
Production will be about 88 x 8766 x 0.5, claimed lifetime capacity factor = 385,704 MWh/y, which is about 35% of the electricity used by 2 nearby Norwegian oil rigs, which cost at least $1.0 billion each.
.
On an annual basis, the existing diesel and gas-turbine generators on the rigs, designed to provide 100% of the rigs electricity requirements, 24/7/365, will provide only 65%, i.e., the wind turbines have 100% back up.
.
The generators will counteract the up/down output of the wind turbines, on a less-than-minute-by-minute basis, 24/7/365
.
The generators will provide almost all the electricity during low-wind periods, and 100% during high-wind periods, when rotors are feathered and locked.
.
The capital cost of the entire project was about 8 billion Norwegian Kroner, or about $730 million, as of August 2023, when all 11 units were placed in operation, or $730 million/88 MW = $8,300/kW. See URL
.
That cost was much higher than the estimated 5 billion NOK in 2019, i.e., 60% higher
.
The project is located about 70 miles from Norway, which means minimal transport costs of the entire supply to the erection sites
The project produces electricity at about 42 c/kWh, no subsidies, at about 21 c/kWh, with 50% subsidies
.
In Norway, all work associated with oil rigs is very expensive.
Three shifts of workers are on the rigs for 6 weeks, work 60 h/week, and get 6 weeks off with pay, and are paid well over $150,000/y, plus benefits.
.
MAINE:
If Norwegian units were used in Maine, the production costs would be even higher in Maine, because of the additional cost of transport of almost the entire supply, including specialized ships and cranes, across the Atlantic Ocean, plus
.
A high voltage cable would be hanging from each unit, until it reaches bottom, say about 200 to 500 feet.
.
The cables would need some type of flexible support system
The cables would be combined into several cables to run horizontally to shore, for at least 25 to 30 miles, to several onshore substations, to the New England high voltage grid.
.
https://www.offshore-mag.com/regional-reports/north-sea-europe/arti…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_wind_turbine
I believe when you said “8,300/kW” you meant 8,300/MW
Which would be a staggering $8.30/kW
Socialism’s answer to everything: throw more money at it
Exhibit #1. The NHS
Much the same situation is occurring in Tasmania … where the State is being relied upon as ‘the battery of the nation’ to export Tasmania’s Hydro power to ‘support’ the failing National Energy Market (and Victoria-stan in particular).
Of course … the Tasmanian political classes are yet to recognize this reality – but it is only a matter of time!
Yes, and again Tasmania does very well out of it – hence the wish to build a second cable.
Of course the trade is two-way, and power flow in Basslink is about Net Zero. They buy cheap Victorian power when they can, and sell their power when the price is high.
And hope they don’t have a dry year and/or a cable issue.
But hey, they still have some diesel gens somewhere.
If you do stupid things, expect bad outcomes.
schadenfreude is such a perfect word.
Costs with
High % of electric power generation from
Germany Renewables.936
Finland Nuclear 40
Poland Coal 164
France Nuclear 275
Says it all
Finland- nuclear and woody biomass- see my other post on this.
And yet Stokes absolutely insists that RE is the cheapest form of electricity, despite all the evidence to the contrary.
I think we need to start calling him Thick-Nick !
Nuclear provides 35% of Finland electricity. They use mix of nuclear, coal, hydro and biomass.
They project increase of nuclear share if electricity generation to 60% by 2030.
‘Its always blowing somewhere in Europe so there will always be wind power’
Well that statement has been comprehensively disproved this winter.
And if Global warming is concentrated in the colder regions then the temp differential that drives the winds is decreased and so must the wind turbine output.
That’s why most ‘extreme’ weather is in winter and early spring.
So the German economy is being destroyed by an unreliable energy supply (with UK trying hard to catch up) in an effort to halt the global climate crisis driven by CO2.
Meanwhile at Mauna Loa: https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/
Keep going chaps, we are not there yet!
Any reductions in CO2 by Germany and the UK will be offset by increases in CO2 from China and India and other places.
German and UK politicians are just spinning their wheels when it comes to reducing global CO2 and are bankrupting their citizens in the process.
CO2-phobia is a real problem, with real, detrimental consequences.
Most stuff is made in China and India. Because the Eu and US have nothing to export they can only print to buy the stuff they import. That’s the inflation bankrupting their citizens in the process by killing the purchasing power of their fiat money. Every day your savings buy less stuff.
The IEA say that as a unit the 10 countries of SE Asia have the second highest growth rate in energy demand after India and that demand is expected to grow 33% by 2035. Fossil fuels accounted for almost 75% of power in the region in 2023 with coal being the primary power source.
Coal accounted for 60% of additional electricity production in the region over the past 20 years and now amounts to almost 110GW of capacity. Over 50% of this capacity is less than 10 years old and more than 80% is less than 20 years old.
SE Asia is going to be using coal for electricity generation for a long time!
IEA ‘World Energy Outlook 2024’ (Oct 2024)
You can push people only so far. I foresee a violent backlash against green activists, politicians and hangers on.
I think that is inevitable. I just don’t know how long it’s going to take. But it looks closer now than it used to be. People are suffering real, dire consequences from these ridiculous, ineffectual efforts to reduce CO2.
The natives are getting restless.
And the not-natives too.
Should have happened by now but, they continue to vote for the greenies.
The Tories is the UK lost the election because they became greenies and woke. They started the Net-Zero stupidity.
Also mass immigration was started under Tory government.
As I see and read about this NON sense almost daily, I have to give solid credit to my grade-school Critical Thinking “larnin” back in the 1940’s and early 1950’s, that have protected me for my almost 9 decades. Most of this ‘stuff & nonsense’ is very difficult to understand, so I will point to the present-day educational system(s).
Trumpification! 🙂
Something about these claims makes absolutely no sense at all. In the USA today the average wholesale cost of combined cycle natural gas generated electricity is about $55/MW-HR. While bringing plants online in the grid is more expensive than keeping them on the grid full time, and while natural gas prices and availability may be more expensive in Europe than in the USA, we are talking about more than an order of magnitude higher costs there.
Any European can go online and see what other developed nations are paying for their electricity rates … why aren’t they taking to the streets to protest the combination of bad policy, incompetent management, and most likely outright thievery causing this fiasco?
The cost of the natural gas is the main driver of power prices. Europeans have the same gas turbine suppliers that the U.S. does. They simply do not have the same supplies and that drives the costs up.
They had until Nord Stream was blown up.
That’s not really true. The biggest cost is the capital cost for the facility. Those costs are incurred 24/7 whether the facility is running or not. The only way those costs get recovered is by selling power. If you half the time that the facility operates you essentially need to double the price paid for power when it does generate. Add to that the fact that starting/stopping/ramping up and down is very hard on the equipment. It shortens its useful life and increases maintenance costs significantly.
No, this is true, and what you say is also correct but a less important factor. The gas burning facilities already existed and were mostly amortized. Shutting down cheap nuclear and coal that used to provide the bulk of baseline needs and replacing this coal and nuclear with cheap Russian gas worked until they had it. Using several time more expensive LNG kills German industry.
Another factor is that there are simply not enough gas burning facilities to cover peak needs during dunkelflaute. The only way to keep the grid stable is to reduce consumption by raising prices. Shortages of gas burning facilities drive electricity prices up.
“halve” the time… lol
I am on a tariff I signed up to in July that fixed my Kwh price at 22p until July 2025, regardless of what happens in the spot market. The quoted prices in the article are spot wholesale, they will only be reflected in consumer prices when contracts are renewed. A very slow motion train wreck like slow boiling a lobster, its dead before it notices.
”Why aren’t they taking to the streets”
Because most people are not extremist. That’s why extremist always need less people to control the rest of the population.
The greens are extremist just like the woke.
First, the cost of LNG is several times higher than the pipeline gas they used before. Second, gas burning was normally covering part of baseload needs and the variable part, but there are not enough gas burning facilities to cover all needs. The shortages drive prices up.
Germany has behaved so stupidly over their crazy non-scientific thinking on energy.
The Marxists are conquering Europe without a shot. With immigration, censorship, the EU, and AGW all combining to bring their economies and societies down. Once completely subdued they will be easy pickings for the Marxists to “save” them.
It is not productive to blame everything on Euro Marxists just because we do not like them. It is important to recognize that the real force behind AGW is the global banking oligarchy, equally, if not more, based in USA. Marxists only have found their convenient niche in the scam. Censorship and immigration is also not solely Marxists’ fault.
“Not productive”? So tell me how the “global banking oligarchy” would benefit from societal and economic collapse, immigration, and censorship.
The problem is not really about coal and gas power stations producing at a higher cost. Rather, in this instance, there is simply not enough capacity to meet demand. They are already running at full capacity and the only way to settle the market is by pushing prices up to where some demand dwindles. Effectively that is the industry shutting down.
Sometime, perhaps in a very distant future, German voters may elect leaders who understand that policy doesn’t overrule physics or economics. For now the slide into chaos continues under the “leadership“ of imbeciles and fraudsters.
The English language routinely imports new words for new situations.
Now, we have ‘dunkelflucked’ meaning the wind fluctuated – to near zero velocity.
Then, electricity is too expensive to turn on the lights. Welcome to the Dark Ages.
This reality has been obvious for decades.
But, no elite person cared! Especially not our ‘morons in power.’
As I have proven for a decade now, with actual numbers from actual grids, solar and wind need virtually 100% backup, and by “filling in the gaps” with wildly varying “backup” sources, the cost of the “backup sources” is greatly increased and the entire grid is made fragile and subject to many disastrous scenarios in the long run. Enjoy the inevitable slide back to the bronze age with dirty air and fouled waterways to boot!
Anyone familiar with winter weather knows that the lowest temperatures happen when cold, still air settles in behind a storm front. When wind power is needed most, it won’t be there.