Skip to content

Green Nightmare: Germany’s Clean Energy Flops While Global Fossil Fuels Boom…

June 14, 2018

By Paul Homewood

Dellers reports from Breitbart:


Germany, epicentre of global environmentalism, is losing faith in the green dream. Its energy minister has admitted that it will fall some way short of its 2020 climate targets and that voters are weary of the renewable energy projects which in Germany alone cost taxpayers around €25 billion per year.

EurActiv reports:

Voters across Europe have lost faith in politics partly because of “unachievable targets” on renewable energy, said German Energy Minister Peter Altmaier, who rejected calls from a group of other EU countries to boost the share of renewables to 33-35% of the bloc’s energy mix by 2030. […]

“Germany supports responsible but achievable targets,” Altmaier said from the outset, underlining Berlin’s efforts to raise the share of renewables to 15% of the country’s overall energy mix.

But he said those efforts also carried a cost for the German taxpayer, which he put at €25 billion per year. “And if we are setting targets that are definitely above 30%, that means that within a decade, our share has to be more than doubled – clearly more than doubled,” Altmaier pointed out.

Meanwhile, France24 reports:

Rather than cutting emissions of the greenhouse gas by 40 percent compared with 1990 levels, Europe’s largest economy will manage reductions of just 32 percent, said the annual climate report for 2017 signed off by Chancellor Angela Merkel’s cabinet.

The shortfall of eight percentage points translates into around 100 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) pumped into the air annually.

These are shocking admissions from the country which has probably done more than any other to advocate for “clean energy”. Germany had set itself the ambitious target of becoming completely independent of fossil fuels in a scheme known as Energiewende.

Last year, the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Energy published a brochure claiming Energiewende had been a huge success story. But this was a lie according to this German research document, published in English under the name Compendium for a Sensible Energy Policy.

It says:

The Energiewende has the goal of making Germany independent of fossil fuels in the long term. Coal, oil and gas were to be phased out, allowing drastic reductions in carbon dioxide emissions. However, these goals have not even begun to be achieved.

The Energiewende was only driven forward in the electricity sector, which, accounts for only one-fifth of energy consumption. There were hardly any successes in the heating/cooling and transport sectors. And so carbon dioxide emissions in Germany have been rising since 2009, even though well over a hundred billion euros have been spent on the expansion of solar and wind energy over the same period.

The financial obligations undertaken in the process will continue to burden taxpayers for another two decades and will end up costing German consumers a total sum of around 550 billion euros. Despite this enormous effort, security of supply is increasingly under threat.

At the same time, people and the biosphere are suffering; wildlife protection has become subordinated to climate mitigation, even though the possibility of achieving the goals of reducing carbon dioxide emissions is becoming increasingly distant and the measures for the energy transition seem to become more and more questionable from a constitutional point of view.

This news is the latest in a series of disasters for the renewables industry. It follows a crash in the price of solar energy (after China decided to cut subsidies) and the failure of Britain’s wind turbines to produce energy for over a week.

Meanwhile, fossil fuels – especially the most hated one of all, coal – are experiencing an unlikely boom.

According to the Financial Times:

Thermal coal, tagged the least-loved major commodity by analysts, is defying sceptics, with prices rising to the highest level since 2012 thanks to strong Asian demand.

High-grade Australian thermal coal, the benchmark for the vast Asia market, was quoted at $112.60 a tonne on Monday by Argus Media.

The fuel, which is burnt in power stations to generate electricity, has now jumped 130 per cent from its 2016 lows, boosting the profits of big producers such as Glencore and Peabody. The price of South African thermal coal has also hit a six-year high as consumers in Asia scramble for supplies.

While thermal coal is being phased out in Europe on environmental grounds, it still accounts for about 40 per cent of energy consumption in emerging markets, especially Asia.

Demand from India, Japan and South Korea has been robust in the first five months of the year, while an early summer heatwave has lifted imports into China despite Beijing’s efforts to keep a lid on domestic coal prices.

  1. June 14, 2018 12:25 pm

    “’Germany supports responsible but achievable targets,’ Altmaier said from the outset, underlining Berlin’s efforts to raise the share of renewables to 15% of the country’s overall energy mix.”

    When you can chop down and the riverine forests of the southeastern United States, turn them into pellets and burn them as complying with CO2 reduction, you are some kind of stupid. Or some kind of assuming everyone else is stupid.

    What IS it with the Germans? They seem to have and be a major problem.

    • June 14, 2018 12:26 pm

      Ignore the first “and”–resulted from an edit.

    • Dave Ward permalink
      June 14, 2018 1:32 pm

      “What IS it with the Germans?”

      But it’s us “Brits” who are burning your forests!

      • Gerry, England permalink
        June 15, 2018 12:40 pm

        Only under orders from the EU.

    • John F. Hultquist permalink
      June 15, 2018 5:09 am

      ” chop ”

      That’s funny!

  2. iananthonyharris permalink
    June 14, 2018 12:57 pm

    Entirely agree. And now isn’t burning wood increasingly problematic, anyway? It’s a lose/lose situation

  3. keith permalink
    June 14, 2018 2:33 pm

    Don’t think for one minute our Energy Dept and Claire Perry will be taking any notice. They’ll still be running around with fingers in their ears singing La La La, unless of course the NGO crooks at Greenpeace etc are talking to them.

    • HotScot permalink
      June 14, 2018 3:59 pm


      I think they are listening. The fiasco that is the Brexit negotiations are a complete shambles and our government have some big decisions to make. Do they drag their heels, get swamped by the EU and conduct a weasel Brexit thereby aligning themselves with a crumbling political union; or do they start talking to Trump seriously. I mean the guy’s covering himself with glory for actually daring to implement his manifesto promises, and has stuck two fingers up at the EU.

      The EU in turn has expressed their desire for ‘retaliation’, precisely what they have been covertly doing to the UK after we voted to get out. Our politicians have an over inflated opinion of their political abilities, and the abilities of politics in general to conduct what is, in reality, a business deal, which Trump seems very good at. Having said that, time will tell.

      I’m damn sure I would rather deal with Trump, and the rest of the world leaving the EU to their incestuous, petty protectionism.

      Chlorinated chicken?! Our tap water is chlorinated for Pete’s sake, and 50% of European poultry is contaminated with salmonella to one degree or another because they won’t use a chlorine wash.

      • Gerry, England permalink
        June 15, 2018 12:50 pm

        Sadly you leave your knowledge zone when you venture on to Brexit.

        The EU is not interested in ‘retaliation’ since May supported by those who believe in a Hard Brexit has chosen a path that will decimate the UK economy without any need for outside help. The negotiations are a shambles – your one correct point – simply because May & Co, and all Hard Brexiteers, have no understanding of the EU rules an how they will apply to us as a ‘third country’ come March. They don’t even register what a ‘third country’ is and stupidly think that the series of Notices to Stakeholders that the EU have produced – 64 so far – is some sort of negotiating position. They are not, they are a statement of fact of ‘third country’ rules. For example, no car exports to the EU because the accreditation to market them lapses in March. Luckily for BMW, legislation is being drafted to enable to transfer their Mini accreditation to Germany and for any EU based manufacturer with a UK accreditation.

        As for Trump…he will keep his promise to do what is best for the USA and screw us when required. Since he had a strong agricultural vote, front and centre will be forcing hormone beef, chicken so badly raised it needs a chlorine wash, cheap eggs on us and wiping out our own home industry.

      • HotScot permalink
        June 15, 2018 6:21 pm

        Gerry, England

        The childish EU response to Trump raising tariffs on steel, was described as ‘retaliation’ and demonstrates their mindset. They have been bloody minded about Brexit from the start and want revenge.

        And you’re prediction of the UK economy tumbling into terminal decline is a hackneyed old term now. You sound like a climate alarmist.

        And no car exports to the EU because the accreditation lapses in March, and, judging by your tone, won’t be renewed, isn’t vindictive retaliation?

        Some 50% of chicken sold across the EU carries salmonella to some degree or another. The advice? Make sure you cook it properly. The Americans won’t risk selling poultry contaminated with salmonella in the first place, hence the chlorine wash. But then of course you knew that because you shower/bath/wash/drink chlorine treated water and it’s done you no harm whatsoever. As far as the eggs go, you’re sounding like a climate alarmist again.

        You have no idea what will happen to our egg industry because Brexit has never happened before, so you have no evidence.

  4. June 14, 2018 4:02 pm

    There is no mention of nuclear power and the fact that Germany is phasing out “clean” nuclear in favour of “dirty” coal and “dirty” biomass (not to mention wind and solar, which due to their massive carbon footprint, their intermittency and their need for backup, actually increase emissions).

  5. Richard Woollaston permalink
    June 14, 2018 5:12 pm

    At least the Germans had the good sense not to pass a Climate Change Act, meaning they can, relatively easily, change the goalposts.

    On the topic of wood pellets, it is surprising but true that the biomass plants are so green because they emit no political CO2. The political CO2 is deemed to be emitted at the point of harvest, not combustion. As it is largely harvested in the USA, and the USA is not a signatory to Kyoto, then the political CO2 never gets accounted for. Sir Humphrey couldn’t have dreamed anything better up.

    • Russ Wood permalink
      June 15, 2018 3:12 pm

      I don’t know if it’s infectious, but the South African government has just passed a “Climate Change Act”. It doesn’t actually COMMIT to anything, so a lot of the more skeptical Saffers consider it just another way that the ANC think they can pocket more of the taxpayers’ money.

  6. Gerry, England permalink
    June 15, 2018 12:53 pm

    ‘Voters across Europe have lost faith in politics partly because of “unachievable targets” on renewable energy, said German Energy Minister Peter Altmaier.’

    It will obviously be a surprise to Altmaier but I doubt that anyone is disillusioned with consensus centre-left politics because of failure to deliver renewable energy.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: