By P Gosselin on 29. April 2026
Germany’s Klimanachrichten reports on the recent phenomenon of extreme negative electricity prices on the European power exchange, specifically highlighting the role of solar energy (photovoltaics) in this development.
Oversupplying the power grid leads to negative prices, ineffciency. Symbol image generated by Grok AI.
Being weather-dependent, it’s become almost impossible to match supply to demand. Sometimes the prices go negative.
According to Klimanachrichten, electricity prices at the exchange reached new record lows in the negative range. This occurs when the supply of electricity significantly exceeds demand, and producers must effectively pay consumers to take the power off the grid.
A primary driver for this surplus is the massive expansion of solar power. During periods of high solar radiation (sunny days) combined with low weekend or holiday demand, the grid gets flooded with “must-take” renewable energy and there’s an increasing difficulty to balance the power grid. Unlike traditional power plants, which can be throttled more easily, the fluctuating nature of solar and wind requires complex interventions to prevent grid overloads.
Because renewable energy operators are often guaranteed a fixed feed-in tariff regardless of market prices, the “gap” between the negative market price and the guaranteed remuneration must be covered by subsidies (often financed through taxes or levies). Since solar owners often receive money even when their electricity has a “negative value,” there is little incentive to invest in storage technologies like batteries.
Klimanachrichten has long since been critical of current energy transition (Energiewende) policies, arguing that the rapid expansion of weather-dependent renewables without adequate storage or flexible demand leads to massive economic inefficiencies and puts the industrial base at risk due to high system costs.
“The record negative prices are the market’s loudest warning signal that we have an oversupply of unstable generation, but a dramatic lack of flexibility and storage capacity,” Klimanachrichten summarizes.
The article suggests that the current subsidy model is unsustainable and calls for a shift toward a system where renewable energy producers are more exposed to market risks, incentivizing the synchronization of production with actual demand.
I have a sneaking suspicion that the Spanish brown out last year, when two PV plants dropped off the grid initiating a cascade of grid failure was due to the negative pricing that started that morning. After all that investment the temptation to ‘accidentally’ switch off to retain positive cashflow would be high.
Solar industrial estate funding in Australia has basically disappeared because of this.
Because there is so much roof top solar producing during the middle of the day when demand is already low… prices are zero or negative.. So why invest in something that cannot make money.!
Which is exactly why Government Subsidization is required to keep these Subsidy Farms functioning.
So, the Germans have made a total dog’s dinner of it all. But have they thought of this?
The sale of traditional tumble dryers is to be stamped out in a Net Zero drive that will push consumers toward more expensive heat pump machines that take longer to dry clothes. The Telegraph has the story.
The Americas are a tale of two basic models of European colonisation, one in the North and the other in Meso and South America. It isn’t difficult to see which model works better for people. So, it is no great surprise to see Colombia plugging the usual line…
The world is threatened by a “suicidal” model of capitalism that is leading to war, fascism and the potential extinction of humanity, Colombia’s president has said, as he convened 57 governments to address the climate crisis.
…
“We are heading towards barbarism. And barbarism is the prelude to, or the very essence of, fascism.” – Grauniad
How very Spanish.
Gustavo Petro. Porque no te callas?
I wouldn’t call any of this capitalism, this is state nanny’s on steroids. Capitalism keeps saying no this is too expensive and you are wasting materials. Government keeps saying here are some more mandates and billions in subsidies.
It’s a command economy where energy is concerned. You will sell n heat pumps, EVs etc etc or you will get fined heavily for not doing so.
Having an oversupply of unstable generation on the grid is a lot like having an oversupply of rat or mouse droppings in your food. Yum.
Oh, Great! Now I’m going to have to wash out my Mind’s Eye!!!
AI could image that nicely. 🙂
“See? The cost of renewables is so cheap that the price can even be negative. Told ya!”
Correct – LCOE shows that renewables are cheaper than fossil fuels . The major error is LCOE assumes all the electricity generated is used. As the negative pricing exposes, renewables require significant over building to compensate for the low production days. The result considerable wasted generation and a grossly inflated denominator.
BOOM!
Too cheap too meter – looks like the giant fusion reactor in the sky fullfilled that old promise 😀
For a moment. One hit wonders are no basis for a modern 21st century economy that requires cheap, affordable power every minute of every day.
But you seem to think they are – despite the vast number of corrections to your oddthink that you receive here on a nigh on daily basis.
That’s true faith. Shame it’s wholly misguided.
The beauty of solar energy is that you have have all your lights on, for nothing, during those 6 or so hours around midday…
… then you don’t need to turn them off at the switch during the evening and night time and early morning, when you want to sleep. !
But if you want to party… forget it.
Candles and CO2.
Son: Hey dad, what did you use for lights before candles?
Dad: electricity.
Humor – a difficult concept.
— Lt. Saavik
Well….they’re just Dancing in the Dark.
Swing, and a miss.
Only for a few hours a day, when nobody needs it. !
I guess you would buy a car that only worked for one hour, at midnight.. just because it was cheap..
The best bit is the fossil fuel generators can operate there generators as motors because that is typically how they stabilize. So the irony is Germany is paying the fossil fuel generators anyhow 🙂
And what happened for the remainder 23hrs and 26 minutes of the day?
At least you acknowledge the sun provides earth’s energy.
One small step at a time. /s
Quite possibly your stupidest comment to date, and that is saying something.
Not only is it metered, every penny they pay someone, they will charge back when the demand goes positive.
but actually what happens is they get paid to shunt power, and give credits against future power…. which they is like saying ‘buy more and save more’.
There is no scenario under your great fusion reactor in the sky where waste is good.
There is no point at all in even trying to explain reality to someone so lost in dogma. One can only pity such mindless devotion.
This is what happens when politicians with totalitarian ideologies try to make engineering decisions…
LOL. The politicians do not necessarily need totalitarian ideologies to try to interfere with sound engineering decisions.
Respectfully disagree. This is what happens when politicians with totalitarian ideologies try to make
engineeringtotalitarian decisions…Adam Smith strikes again!!!!!!!!
How so?
Negative prices…. think about that. Or try negative interest rates… Failing those, try negative equity.
Go read ‘The Wealth of Nations’. Then you’ll understand…….
You give MUNR credit for intelligence and reading comprehension that he has demonstrated time and time again he lacks. 🙂
Then you’ll understand
From what I’ve seen, not likely.
“then you’ll understand”
That dumd@zz? highly unlikely
Why can’t they just run the surplus to ground?
That could be called a Short Circuit which grids don’t care much for. The solution could be to require Solar, both Utility and Rooftop, to have adequate on site Battery Storage so hourly overproduction isn’t pumped straight into the grid but saved for times of increased demand
Why can’t they just stop building shit that doesn’t work more often than it does?
That’s the realists solution to the great non-problem
When very large currents are injected into the earth, the area around the point of injection may rise to a high potential with respect to points distant from it. This gradient creates a hazard to anyone standing on the earth even some distance away. They can become the thing needed to complete the circuit. Ouch!
Bad for the electronics… It would be more fun if they overdrove the wind turbines with it -giant fans! and the fans could be used to blow hot air toward Antarctica. That would make super ice melt slides for AR7.
(Sea level rise… grrr… well Australians aren’t using most of their Australia anyway. The rest of the world? Eff em, mate.)
The article was actually Germany, not Australia. Somehow solar talk ends up getting dragged South. Germany is reserved for wind turbine bashing.
(They’d have to melt Greenland instead of Antarctica. It might wreck the Netherlands, but eggs/omelettes)
i suspect ground shunting is probably ok for rooftop and distributed applications, but for ‘grid scale stuff it is not a good idea.
There’s an easy solution to this. Wind and solar should get no “priority” for grid use, and should receive no payment whatsoever for what they overproduce, and then it can be replaced by what actually works.
But then, nobody would want wind or solar. How dare you!
Wise Men say
Only Fools love solar
Which explains Nick and MUNRL.
Perhaps the solution is to Require ALL Solar installations, even Rooftop Solar, to install large battery arrays in which to store their own excess production during times of peak production and low demand that can then release it back into the system at times of low production and high demand. In the case of Utility Scale Solar require GWh Battery storage and for Rooftop Solar KWh storage.
Do the math. You picked numbers that do not even cover 24 hours and to recharge, those nonsensical toys would have nothing to deliver when needed.
You are proposing an electrical grid based on the plug-in EV model. Except the lack of charging stations and battery capacity hamper both severely.
Now, that aside, the only way to require massive battery arrays is by government fiat, which means more and more tax payer dollars funding something that does not work and making certain people very rich for signing on.
We will not talk about the human cost of mining the necessary materials and how likely it is we will run out of copper (there is a lot) before we run out of petroleum and natural gas and coal and uranium.
We will not talk about the environmental destruction, including wildlife, created by construction of these obscenities, nor will we address the toxic disposal issues associated with WTG and SV.
There is no single, simple answer that makes those idiocies work.
Government can require minimum specifications for construction without taxpayer funding footing the bill. Just ask Gavin Screwyousome and Commiefornia. Every new house Must Have Rooftop Solar. Every window replacement must be Dual Pane. Every Mobile.Home furnace replacement must be 95% efficient. No government funding required.
I guess that is one way the subsidies can be paid back!
When Planning Engineer and I wrote ‘True Cost of Wind’ over at Judith’s some years ago, we included a section specifically on negative prices, explaining how and why they are a very bad grid sign.
And here Germany is with record negative prices. I am sure Norway is delighted to ‘buy’ that negatively priced electricity ( meaning Germany pays Norway to take it) and save its hydro for when Germany needs it at very positive prices during “Dunkelflaute”. Hard to imagine a more perverse German situation.
There is always a cost to waste. When germany needs the Hydro, Norway will certainly sell it to them…at market price. Norway needs to pay for and maintain their dams.
What is the most profitable use for electricity when the sun is high and hot? I’d like a chart of Bitcoins mined vs Australian weather.
100% of installed pv solar contributes to instability of power grids. And it pushes CT production at high prices late in the day. See also:Duck curve
This is so stupid it takes my breath away. You can solve the problem by eliminating the must take ideology and policy. It makes sense to only pay for what we use. Get the government out of the energy production and transmission business and the problem disappears.
“toward a system where renewable energy producers are more exposed to market risks…” How dare anyone would want to expose renewable investors to market risks. These outfits invested in virtuous good faith, that they would have a guaranteed return forever.
According to Google AI.
“The cost of storing solar energy is currently 4 to 6 times more expensive than the cost of producing it.
Solar Production Cost: Approximately US$25–$45 per MWh for utility-scale photovoltaic (PV) plants.
Storage Cost (4-hour battery): Approximately US$110–$180 per MWh for a standard lithium-ion system.
Combined “Firm” Solar: When you pair solar with enough storage to provide steady power (Solar + Storage), the total cost typically doubles or triples the price of the energy alone, landing between US$60–$100 per MWh.”
Negative pricing is actually positive for green energy because it forces constant, reliable, stable forms of power (coal, gas, nuclear, maybe hydro) out of the market since they need to make a profit whereas green energy’s profits are often from other sources – government subsidies, green credits government makes mandatory for disfavoured corporations to purchase etc.
Of course as constant, reliably, stable energy is removed from the grid, and unreliable power takes over, blackouts and forced appliance switch-offs become the norm, but don’t expect cost savings!
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2026/04/30/grid-balancing-costs-set-to-rise-to-8-billion-by-2030/
Same thing in the UK. You cannot get away from the fact that wind and solar are pretty much guaranteed to have production highs at lowest demand and lowest supply at peak demand. Each imposes costs in different ways.
Bottom line is that however free the wind and sun are, systems involving using them at scale are way more costly than conventional.
As I say elsewhere today, a bit like sailing ships. Wind was free, canvas and men less so.
Who thinks that battery technology is anywhere near better now than last century?
Are there any battery experts reading WUWT, is there a section dedicated to that particular topic?