Representatives of the 27 member states approved a package raising the current goal of 32% to 45% by 2030. About 22% of the EU’s total energy consumption came from renewables in 2021, meaning the new target will double the amount in less than a decade.
The renewable mandate is not a bad idea per se, but the German opposition to nuclear power is incredibly harmful, and compounded by their inexplicable support for so-called e-fuels.
What’s the deal with e-fuels? Did companies bastardize their legislation and make it so they can still pollute or something?
They’re synthetically produced hydrocarbons, so they can more or less be replaced easily. The energy sources for producing them are, in theory, carbon neutral (renewables or nuclear) but for it to work they need captured CO or CO2 as well as the H2 from non-carbon sources.
There are at least 3 major problems with them in my opinion:
- Keeping them around makes it possible, easier and cheaper to keep those engines running, instead of changing the technological base.
- There’s likely to be difficulties in assuring that the H2 is completely carbon-neutral. Once H2 is mixed in pipes and so on, distinguishing which or how much of it was generated without carbon is a problem. Not to mention the many possibilities for fraud.
- It also requires carbon capture to work, and it sets up the perfect conditions for carbon-capture projects which would otherwise not be feasible to become so. Capturing carbon is good, but not when it’s going to be released all over again. And it may easily lead to making it easier to run coal or natural gas on the grounds it will produce captured carbon for efuels.
The e-fuels will ensure the “survival” of internal combustion engines, and obviously somebody is lobbying like crazy for that to happen.
And since this is Germany pushing them, we can more or less know who. Same people that tried to cover up and avoid liability for dieselgate.
The VW Group is all in on EVs. The big push is from niche sports car builders, which are an utterly insignificant amount of daily traffic and airlines.
Sports car builders are trying to keep a hobby alive, not part of the transportation industry.It’s true luxury cars are involved too, and secured themselves the so-called Lamborghini exception, and of course airlines are the major player here.
But EVs are a bit speculative still, and the existence of efuls is likely to delay them, and give these companies bad ideas about continuing to produce the same engines. I don’t know for sure if they’re involved in the push, but even if EVs are their plan A, I wouldn’t at all be surprised to find out efuels are their plan B.
EVs aren’t remotely speculative any longer. Fuel efficiency targets are locked in and anyone who wants to sell cars in 10 years is spending billions to get the infrastructure and development in place to make EVs.
Efuels are what are speculative and it is highly doubtful they will be anything but expensive. Which is fine for luxuries like sports cars. And even unnecessary international flights are a luxury. We just feel entitled to them.
They shouldn’t have shut down their old nuclear reactors before having an alternative to coal and gas. But nuclear is not the future. It is not economically feasinle to build new reactors and renewable energy is cheaper.
Meanwhile nuclear is not profitable without subsidies or government garanties.
Solar wind and batteries are the best way to generate electricity riggt now.
Agreement had been held up by France and several eastern European countries demanding that hydrogen produced with nuclear power should be counted toward renewable energy targets. The German government, which opposed this, said that will now not be the case, though there will “a bit more flexibility” on hydrogen targets for countries that meet their renewable energy goals.
I hate the German Greens. I hate the German Greens. I hate the German Greens.
This is especially ridiculous because nuclear reactors also produce heat that doesn’t become electricity, so it’s a good opportunity to do high-temperature electrolysis.
Nuclear cogeneration and hydrogen would be ideal for, for example, decarbonising steel-making or fertilisers, but no. sigh
