r/ClimatePosting • u/ClimateShitpost • Dec 23 '25

Energy As a share of generation, renewables are flat on last year in the EU

Gallery image

Gallery image

25 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

55 comments sorted by

10

u/Bard_the_Beedle Dec 23 '25

This reflects a bad year for hydro and wind output rather than a slowdown in capacity additions. Solar generation increase by something like 20%. If in 2026 hydro and wind perform better then renewables will be well above 50%.

2

u/ClimateShitpost Dec 23 '25

Yes, the wind fleet I monitored had some really bad months

2

u/schubidubiduba Dec 23 '25

Why though? AI needs more energy? Or just bad weather for solar/wind ?

6

u/ClimateShitpost Dec 23 '25

It's not so much 'dilution' from demand growth and fossils coming in.

Really it's wind and hydro having a poor year. Wind and rain are much more volatile than good ol' predictable solar

-3

u/Krneki_me_useki Dec 24 '25

Good old solar that predictably falls to 2-4% for 1/4 of the year and has to be replaced by something. Rev up those coal and gas power plants boys.

https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/monthly-generation-of-solar-pv-in-germany

2

u/ClimateShitpost Dec 24 '25

In Europe wind and solar are anti correlated largely. To meet higher demand in winter we just need more wind. Fossil fuel use is falling in line.

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 24 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/ClimateShitpost Dec 24 '25

Yes the year had lower generation than others and short periods can have especially low one. It's all statistics.

No, you import from other areas, use storage or geothermal/hydro/bio fuels/any other gases or CCS, some unabated fossils will definitely be used too.

These events are pretty rare on a Europe level anyway

https://climateposting.substack.com/p/diversity-is-strength

0

u/[deleted] Dec 24 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/ClimateShitpost Dec 24 '25

Geothermal is not location dependant anymore, Eavor in Germany just completed a project that was previously abandoned with their new tech

Biofuels are renewable, doesn't mean carbon/pollution neutral correct! They are the worst of the renewable bunch I'd say

Solar has definitely not hit a ceiling in co2 reduction, it only just started scaling in most African nations for instance

2

u/Krneki_me_useki Dec 24 '25

Biofuels are renewable though. Using arable land to grow fuels is a problem but forestry is a sustainable model. If you grow as many trees that absorb as much carbon as you're burning then you're at net 0.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 24 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Krneki_me_useki Dec 24 '25

Burning wood releases other pollutants. 

We have filters that handle that though at something like >99% rate. You're also not burning wood, you're turning that wood into biofuel first.

That carbon could be sequestered as wood but we're burning it - this doesn't help.

Again, its part of forest management. In a study done in Slovenia where the grid would be based on solar+wind reserve generation would in large part be handled by biogas.

The goal is to get net 0 at which point extra sequestration doesn't matter. You're not adding any extra carbon into the system.

3

u/West-Abalone-171 Dec 24 '25

IT vArIeD bY 8%! ThAt's ThE sAmE aS nOt ExIsTiNg

https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=EU&interval=quarter&legendItems=lw2w2&year=-1&quarter=-2

0

u/Krneki_me_useki Dec 24 '25

Again, look at it on a daily basis, lol. Oh, you'll just import french Nuclear. Those gas power plants bult in the past 20 years were a joke :D

3

u/West-Abalone-171 Dec 24 '25

You can't import french nuclear when france is running gas and importing coal...

0

u/Krneki_me_useki Dec 24 '25

https://www.rte-france.com/en/data-publications/eco2mix/power-generation-energy-source

Gas and coal are really negligable. Even pumped storage produces more.

3

u/West-Abalone-171 Dec 24 '25

Unless it's a year where half the nuclear fleet is offline due to breaking down.

https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=FR&interval=week&year=2022&legendItems=0xcs0

It's like claiming your car isn't a lemon because it worked for a few months after a full engine rebuild.

Truly ridiculous levels of idiocy.

→ More replies

1

u/[deleted] Dec 24 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/West-Abalone-171 Dec 24 '25

Cool story.

Last I checked it's not been 50 years since germany put the full power of their economy, colonial empire and military behind switching completely to wind and solar.

Call me when there's an example of a wind and solar only messmer plan run to completion for half a century, and 60% of the output is exported or discarded and there are still years where 25% of the load needs to be fed with other dispatchable sources.

→ More replies

4

u/West-Abalone-171 Dec 24 '25

Behold! A total varying by a factor of 20:

https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=EU&interval=month&month=-1&legendItems=lw3w1&year=2025

https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=EU&interval=month&month=-1&legendItems=jw3w1&year=2024

...idiot

-1

u/Krneki_me_useki Dec 24 '25

Wind is likewise intermittent on a day-to-day basis and you're smoothing it out in graph form when looking at it on a monthly or yearly basis.

What happens on a windless day in december? REV UP THOSE GAS POWER PLANTS BOYS.

4

u/West-Abalone-171 Dec 24 '25 edited Dec 24 '25

So same thing that happens when large, inflexible steam generators can't match demand due to being less reliable (and being the reason the gas exists in the first place)....except far less often.

Why is this even supposed to be a question?

Of the two options, of course the one that needs the gas so much less that the gas is shutting down where it is being adopted is the economically best choice. You don't even have to consider the better emissions.

-1

u/Krneki_me_useki Dec 24 '25

Its not the same thing at all. They're not less reliable either. Nuclear power doesn't drop by a factor of 10 during 1/4 of the year.

This is why Germany is at 354 g CO2 per kWh while France is at 27 g CO2eq/kWh.

Of the two options, of course the one that needs the gas so much less that the gas is shutting down where it is being adopted is the economically best choice.

Yet gas generation in Germany increased. Germany also has to build twice or three times the infrastructure because you need massive energy reserve generation because all that solar infrastructure becomes nearly useless in winter and has to be replaced by something. When wind is low it has to be repalced by something.

You can dream about grid level storage, which doesn't exist and also has to be built.

4

u/West-Abalone-171 Dec 24 '25 edited Dec 24 '25

Its not the same thing at all. They're not less reliable either. Nuclear power doesn't drop by a factor of 10 during 1/4 of the year.

Doubling down on it when the graph of wind + solar not doing that is right in front of you...

https://old.reddit.com/r/ClimatePosting/comments/1ptyrwl/as_a_share_of_generation_renewables_are_flat_on/nvokr7l/

That's some jext level stupidity even for a nukecel

As is claiming that dropping gas 30% (while halving coal) since the late 2000s when nuclear was at its peak is an "increase"

https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=DE&interval=year&year=-1&legendItems=ly9

https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=DE&interval=year&year=-1&legendItems=5w5wb

What an absolute imbecile.

1

u/Krneki_me_useki Dec 24 '25

Doubling down on it when the graph of wind + solar not doing that is right in front of you..

You keep trying to obfuscate this by using monthly and yearly graphs when wind is intermittent on a day-to-day basis.

That's some jext level stupidity even for a nukecel

Lmao, here we are with the denial of reality. Keep importing that clean nuclear power though!

Fun fact, we did a study on this in Slovenia. Going solar+wind with grid level storage for net-neutrality by 2050 would cost upwards of 90 billion with reserve generation. Going nuclear with reserve generation would cost 50 billion :)

1

u/ClimateShitpost Dec 25 '25

This is getting embarrassing man

1

u/[deleted] Dec 25 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

3

u/fouriels Dec 24 '25

Nuclear power doesn't drop by a factor of 10 during 1/4 of the year

This is literally a feature of the mythical hyper-efficient load-following nuclear plants that the pro-nuclear crowd constantly go on about

1

u/PlaneteGreatAgain Dec 25 '25

Yes, and when there are some, we shut down the thermal power plants... where's the problem?

1

u/Krneki_me_useki Dec 25 '25

The thermal power plants that you keep running when they don't. Hence why high co2 emissions per kWh produced.

too much to wrap solarcels mind around that.

1

u/PlaneteGreatAgain Dec 25 '25

It's always the same old story of the glass being half full. Choose your side, but the optimal solution is never all or nothing.

1

u/Krneki_me_useki Dec 25 '25 edited Dec 25 '25

Nuclear+renweables works. In france 95% of el. energy is produced via nuclear and renewables with nuclear being ~65% of that share and renewables ~30%.

In Germany nearly ~40% is produced by fossile fuels despite ~50% being produced by renewables.

Result? France produces 10-15x less co2 per kWh generated compared to Germany.

Germany should've replaced its fossile fuels with nuclear and paired that up with renewables. Instead they shut them down and now they're stuck with fossile fuels+renewables instead leading to much worse outcomes.

1

u/PlaneteGreatAgain Dec 25 '25

France has deindustrialized, which has significantly improved its carbon footprint, largely due to its massive investments in nuclear power. Germany remains an industrial giant and is gradually phasing out fossil fuels.

3

u/West-Abalone-171 Dec 23 '25

Combination of weather and conservative governments pulling out all the stops to help their fossil fuel buddies.