Image: pixabay license
A debate contribution with conceptual considerations for the further development of the energy transition
Apart from the AFD, which absorbs the human climate change and wants to continue to use fossil fuels as before, there is consensus in all parties represented in the german bundestag that climate change represents an existential threat to humanity, with global greenhouse gas emissions, primarily the CO2 emissions that are cause and therefore must be reduced. Everyone also agreed that the time is over and that we have to act quickly when we want to limit the temperature rise.
But instead of acting, some politicians use the right statement that germany can not save the world as an excuse to do nothing to do. Other flames of a complete decarbonization up to 2050 and tend to be a possible CO2 tax. A CO2 tax does not bring anything at the present time, because the energy is used and lack of alternative, consumers only had to pay. In the end only "rip off".
Of course, coal streams were unprofitable in the case of correspondingly high CO2 tax in germany, but the result was only the replacement of the german through polish and czech coal stream, the possibly. Also produced with worse efficiency.
After the good performance of the grunes and the catastrophic losses of the so-called people’s parties in the european elections, all the topic of climate policy has once again discovered completely new for themselves. However, many things fallen better than with my catching after unuccicated and uneasant suggest to produce hectic activity and speech bubbles.
Our current energy supply has developed as a system about more than 100 years and is conceptually ubooted and outdated in many areas. This also requires technical perfection in the implementation nothing.
Is necessary to create a decent and realizable concept for the conversion of the energy supply of the federal republic to renewable energies and then implement it.
When creating this energy concept, you have to go out of real energy consumption and must not try to reckon the need by accepting huge savings potential. Of course, these savings potentials are theoretically available, because it is currently wasted a lot of energy. The question is only if the savings potential really can be used and what consequences that had.
An example of this is the building heating, which pays to our large energy consumers. Of course you can reduce energy consumption through appropriate warming here. But firstly, a rough part of the buildings are old buildings whose energetic renovation is difficult and expensive and secondly, one must also keep an eye on the built-in microclimate.
By breathing, the room air is deprived of oxygen. It is enriched with CO2 and water. If the gas exchange is hindered too much by the dam, you have bad room air, mold and humidity. In practice, therefore, it is often not so useful that the buildings are maximally to dammen, but you prefer to buy a slightly higher energy requirement.
Let’s take the comfort. Hundred years ago, the apartment was heated in the winter of the apartment in just one room or the whole family life was right in the kitchen, because it was heated by the cooking stove. Today it is self-reliable that in winter the whole apartment or. The whole house is heated. Or do we take the daily warm shower or the heat bath. 100 years ago for most people mad luxury, today of self-reliable, normal standard. Of course not surviving, but no one is ready to do without. Nobody wants to go back to the tree, which is good and right.
Similarly, it behaves with the traffic. Of course, there is too much car traffic and that is so do not belong to the duration.
But mobilitat is a basic exemption of the people and the car in the family today largely standard. And this is usually at least a mid-range car. A small car was also sufficient in most cases to "from A to B to come", but offers much less comfort and therefore we keep the luxury to drive a coarse car, even if the environmental policy is bad because of the high exhaust emissions.
Some ultrarune activists therefore demand a ban on gross cars, which they then want to prevail through high taxes on fuels and cars. This is counterproductive nonsense. Bans should remain the last resource. And if already prohibitions, then high emissions, not of rough cars. What we need are intelligent solutions that are acceptable for all members of society and make our society for the future, no stupid fanaticism.
Finally, somewhat basic for supply and assistance. This must have highest priority at all planning. That also means that we must always have a correspondingly coarsent sized reserve capacity.
These reserve capacitiates can be calibrated with fossil fuels, as they are very rare, in exceptional situations, used. And these reserve capacity must remain under national control, which is secured that they are also available when they are needed.
We had a primary energy consumption of 3 in 2018.585 twh. The final energy consumption was about 2.200TH (difference to primary energy consumption is plausible due to efficiency losses through the carnot process).
Net current production was 2018: 542 twh, of which renewable energy carrier: 218.04 twh, of which photovoltaics: 45.75 TW H and wind power 111.35 twh. Solar and wind stream together come to 157.1 twh.
The building heating takes place about halfway with natural gas and 25% with mineralols. The remainder sharing coal, electricity, renewable energy carriers and other. Similarly, it looks like hot water production. Need 2017 together about 830 twh.
In the transport sector, almost 95% mineral products and about 4% biofuels are used. Demand 2017: around 65 million tons fuel, equivalent to 765 twh. (the numbers come from the federal environmental agency and from the arbeitsgemeinschaft energy balance.To)
At least 90% of fossil fuels must be saved within 20 years and replaced by regenerative electricity generated. Only so we can really reduce the CO2 emissions effectively.
If we want to change completely to renewable energy, we have to drive the power generation from the sun and wind for example. This then yields 785 twh. There are still 61 twh from no further increasing regenerative sources (hydropower, house mull, biomass etc.To). Together, almost 850 twh.
Electricity generated by the 850TH in the future is approximately 500 twh for conventional power supply (as today). There are approx. 110 twh for the electromobility. Stay 240 twh to drive heat pumps. With an annual work number of 4 results in the 960 twh heating dwarmes. If one collapses the generated electricity and the environmental administration, you come to 1570TAH.
The difference of 630 twh to today’s consumption results from the fact that it is probably not possible to replace the fossil fuels 100%. For the grazed iron ore you need now coke and aircraft turbines do not run with electricity. Also, in the heating dwarmes, there is still rough savings potentials, which can only be realized over time by demolishing old houses and the new buildings are energetically built.
Of course, it is not immediately possible to dispense with all fossil energy carriers and some areas, z.B. Of good deals and agricultural machinery, were not deliberately not addressed in the concept, because no one can achieve the future need for the future and the technologies that are prevailed here, serious.
But that should not be a problem, because with the implementation of the described program we have the next 15-20 years enough to do. In any case, we can replace the largest part of the fossil fuels with this program. And then we’ll see.
So far, the network was controlled for the load, D.H. The power of the power plant bloc is raised according to the current consumption or. Throttled.
This is not possible with solar and wind energy. These must be produced when sun and wind are present. Short-term oriental fluctuations are grounded in solar and wind power generation by the network as they are statistically. But coarse and later fluctuations in the production must be balanced by the network control.
Unfortunately, in this type of control, the limit of the control capacity is now achieved, as it is technically simply not possible to take advantage of fossil power plant output from the grid in production tips of the regenerative energy. This problem is still encouraged by the fact that we mainly run coal-fired power plants that are a lot to carry for a quick, efficient regulation.
In the future, stores should be charged in times of excess electricity production, which then returns the power to the net at current fawn.
Unfortunately, in the next 10 years, we have neither sufficient battery storage capacity for products nor a lot of green power to load these memory. Stationary power storage to network control will probably only be installed in a significant extent in 10 years, if sufficient second life batteries be available. These are exhausted vehicle batteries, which still have 70-80% of their storage capacity and continue to operate in stationar buffer stores until they are finished completely.
With such saving you will then possibly. The fluctuations in the course of the day can, but not a multi-decid dark fleaness. The storage capacities and services needed for that are simply too rough.
Most concepts therefore see the construction of gas-powered peak load power plants to produce the needed control energy and reserve performance, which requires huge investments, because we talk about a necessary performance of 40-50 GW here.
In addition, with increasing availability of green electricity and battery storage requirements of the control energy requirement and thus the contemporary runtime of the gas-fired power plants is greatly sinking, but it is always necessary to maintain appropriate reserve performance for reasons of supply security, which is then generally causing additional costs and increasing electricity overall.
In addition, there is also a conflict of interest, because for the operators of the gas power plants, it will be more lucrative to produce electricity than only reserve benefit. This then drives in the end that they will try to produce overlying fossil electricity and feed into the net.
Since they compete with the green electricity, they will probably hinder the installation in green electricity as well as today the coal-fired power plant operators. That’s why I suggest another solution based on hybrid cars as a decentralized power plant. At the same time, a second current problem could simultaneously be despised: the lack of lithium-ion batteries in the auto industry.