German energy giant RWE has begun dismantling a wind farm to make way for a further expansion of an open-pit lignite coal mine in the western region of North Rhine Westphalia.

I thought renewables were cheaper than coal. How is this possible?

193 points

I think this headline is misleading.

A better headline might read: “Coal found beneath wind farm. Turbines dismantled to make room for mining operation.”

permalink
report
reply
115 points

i don’t think that’s any better

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points
*

I originally read it as “Germany says ‘Fuck wind as an alternative energy source’ and begins reverting back to coal”, so I figured I’d clarify in case anyone end thought the same thing.

Doesn’t seem like this article indicates that Germans is giving up on alternative energy.

Edit: corrected dumb spelling mistake.

permalink
report
parent
reply

No but it does clearly show prioritization when the 2 conflict, which is the point of contention (as well as using coal at all, if you give a shit about our planetary environment)

permalink
report
parent
reply
54 points

Still, its lignite, they should cease all mining operations.

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

Lignite is the worst coal, most polluting and least energy dense afaik, why would you bother mining it

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Because they get subsidies from the govt bc they employ a whole region and are a super big energy company. They need to be dismantled.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Because it’s there and you want a steady supply of cheap electricity, that’s why.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Shouldn’t they build a new wind farm though? Why aren’t the eco fanatics protesting against this infamy?

They are litteraly replacing a wind farm with a coal mine!

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

If the turbines are still good, they can just be moved, although it looks like they’re EOL anyway, so I’m guessing they’ll just be scrapped.

Won’t make a huge difference to the general trend in the German energy mix, which is towards more renewables + importing French nuclear energy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I… I dont think that really helped make the title misleading

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
138 points

Delete this InfoWars-level bs misinformation meant to smear clean energy.

One small privately owned wind farm is being disassembled, this is not a general new policy or anything signalling a shift away from clean energy.

permalink
report
reply
20 points

Oh gosh, thank you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points

Oh so you mean most arguments against nuclear energy are that bad too? Thank you for realizing!

permalink
report
parent
reply
125 points
*

Ban straws! (even though disabled people need them and they create negligible pollution)

Replace your car with an electric one! (even though it still works fine and will end up in landfill, never mind the environmental cost of producing the new one, or the source of the electricity it uses)

Reduce your carbon footprint! (even though its a term we invented ourselves to shift responsibility to you, while we fly our private jets around creating more pollution than you ever could in 10 lifetimes)

Recycle! (even though 90% of it ends up in landfill anyway because we don’t want to pay to actually recycle it)

All equates to

Look the other way while we continue to rape the planet and blame it on you!!!

Never forget - capitalists (and the governments they’re co-dependent on) only want more money, they don’t car about you or me or the planet, only about themsleves and the numbers in their accounts, and they will never willingly stop doing whatever it takes to make more.

permalink
report
reply
67 points

or the source of the electricity it uses

Oh, quit this noise. In the same countries where electric cars are becoming common, wind/water/sun-produced energy is also on the rise. Electric cars decouple the energy used from the means of production in ways that gasoline will never have, and the potential outweighs the temporary conditions of power generation in socially backward areas like Darfur and America.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-31 points
*

You are literally commenting on an article where one of those countries has shut down a wind farm to go back to miming coal (never mind that my point still stand regardless because renewables are still just a fraction of electricity production, or that it is the wealthy people buying the electric cars who contribute more emissions than the poorest 50% of the population, but good to see the greenwashing has worked so well on you), so which of us is actually making noise, and which is addressing the problems we face?

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Might be a good idea for you to read the article

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Do you believe every headline you read on the internet? Looks like it. This isn’t „Germany end all wind farms“, the people who wrote that headline want you to think that. Don’t be such an easy mark.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Electric cars contribute less emissions than ICE cars even if the grid’s electricity supply is entirely coming from coal. Of course cars in general are a much worse solution to transport than really any form of public transportation, but that’s no reason to spread pro-ICE car propaganda.

permalink
report
parent
reply
51 points
*

While I partly agree with your argument at the end of your comment, I think your examples are really unfitting.

Only single-use plastic straws are banned. There is also an exemption for straws that are necessary for medical reasons. The needs of disabled people are included in the exemption. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2021-003536-ASW_EN.html

If people buy a new car, the old one (if still functional) typically enters the second-hand market, not the landfill. There is no reason why this would be different if the new car is an electric vehicle.

The carbon footprint is a perfectly fine concept on its own, the problem is just that some people shit on it with their private jets, which are a legitimate concern. Some people also argue that “most of the pollution is done by corporations, not individuals”, completely ignoring the fact that these corporations only do it while producing goods for the people. That does not mean that we can just blame the people for it, but everybody has the responsibility to vote for policies that keep the corporations in check.

Recycling is really bad in some countries, but works pretty well in others. For example in Germany 56% of plastic waste is recycled, 44% burned. 90% of paper is recycled. https://www.quarks.de/umwelt/muell/das-solltest-du-ueber-recycling-wissen/#lösung4

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

We’ve made electric powered airplane jet turbines. If the rich want private jets, we should require those to be EVs. I don’t give a shit that the tech is untested, and neither do they judging by that “submarine.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The problem is we are only talking about a small fraction of the trash. >90% of waste is industrial waste, of that a third is just from Construction/Demolition.

Consumers can recycle everything, but it won’t make more than a 10% impact. We need to start forcing industry to recycle and we can start with concrete. 8% of all global emissions are from concrete production, that’s not even accounting the energy to haul it around. We have the ability today to use concrete to make down cycled products on site (road base, filler, non structural blocks, etc) eliminating transportation and other impacts. But few even consider it, companies and customers don’t want to wait the extra day that it takes, and it’s not always profitable either.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I doubt your numbers are factual. Depending on the industry, you’ll have very specific, non mixed waste materials, which would be way easier to recycle than mixed trash from households.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

Do you think cars are immortal, and are just passed on from owner to owner for all eternity?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

No? Nobody thinks that?

My comment was just a response to the following:

Replace your car with an electric one! (even though it still works fine and will end up in landfill, never mind the environmental cost of producing the new one, or the source of the electricity it uses)

…which for some reason suggests that the introduction of electric cars leads to premature scrapping of existing cars - which is bullshit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Only East German ones. Then the pigs eat some rotten parts off of them, and the remainder is reassembled into fewer cars. The circle of life. The last people on this planet will still be driving a Trabi.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Cuban cars are

permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points
*

That’s a lot of words to say “I lick boot”.

But just to address my pet peeve (mostly because I can copy pasta my own comment, and no I’m not going to edit out the “ableist” because even if you don’t mean t, advocating and making excuses for the straw ban is ableist)

There are many reasons people can’t use different alternatives.

Never mind that to deny access to a literal lifeline for the sake of 0.003% of the plastics in the ocean (literally a drop in an ocean) because it makes you feel better and requires zero effort or sacrifice (from you), instead of actually acting to resolve the problem (like being anti-capitalist rather than just trying to apply band aids to its symptoms) is not only gross and ableist, but also a colossal counterproductive waste of time.

As for medical exemptions - disabled people shouldn’t need to ask for basic accessibility, nor should they have to disclose personal medical information to get it, but now that ableists like you have forced this situation to boost your own egos, they do, and are often denied, because wait staff are not medically trained, and are often abelists like you (or have bosses that would fire them for “handing out straws willy nilly” if they even have straws available which now many places don’t), so they get refused and called liars and accused of destroying the environment.
Never mind that expecting people to always have their own accessibility aids, rather than have them freely available creates an inaccessible society.

Which is exactly what ableists like you are fighting for.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

I was exclusively talking about the EU ban, not about some random US cities’ bans (This is a thread about Germany after all). None of your points really apply to the EU ban.

It does not ban the distribution (you can still legally buy leftover stock - my local cinema seems to have a century’s worth of supply), just the first-time sale of newly produced non-medical single-use plastic straws.

The “medical exemption” is not on an individual basis, but an exemption for a production line of straws. Everybody can buy the straws afterwards. The EU ban is not cutting a “lifeline” for disabled people.

The links you provided talk about bans by local city councils in the USA, which have their own (apparantly stupid) rules.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Replace your car with an electric one! (even though it still works fine and will end up in landfill, never mind the environmental cost of producing the new one, or the source of the electricity it uses)

A new EV breaks even with a used car in less than a decade. It does not matter if it is getting its energy from coal, it still will emit less carbon within a decade.

Recycle! (even though 90% of it ends up in landfill anyway because we don’t want to pay to actually recycle it)

90% of plastic recycling. That is thanks to the oil companies who saw backlash against the ridiculous amount of plastic in the 70s and decided to invent a resin code whose symbol mimicked the recycling symbol. Recycling centers were flooded with a ton of plastic which they did not have infrastructure to actually recycle. China took it for a couple decades and then it became unprofitable for them. Basically only resin codes 1 and 2 are recyclable. But most people think all of it is. Absolutely recycle metals. If your city has recycling pickup and you are not recycling stuff like aluminum, you kind of suck.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

I’m from Sweden, we’re among the best in the world at recycling. We have closed all our landfills and even import combustible trash to burn for energy (we clean the fumes extremely well).

Every time I see a discussion about trash anywhere in the world I get sad that people are so uninformed about what’s possible.

One Swedish company, Swedish Plastic Recycling, is currently building a recycling plant that will be able to handle ALL of the country’s plastic waste and automatically recycle almost all of the kinds of plastic there are.

This is even profitable if done right.

Sources upon request.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Basically only resin codes 1 and 2 are recyclable. But most people think all of it is

I read somewhere that this is false and all of them are recyclable. Don’t quote me on it though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I think you can technically recycle probably almost any plastic, perhaps almost any material in general. It’s just a question of if the recycling process is affordable and competes in price with just buying the unrecycled version of that plastic. So other plastics besides PET and HDPE I’m sure you can recycle, it’s just that the cost is prohibitive.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Technically yes but there has to be the infrastructure to do it. Most cities cannot process them. It’s also generally not profitable and does not save much from an emissions standpoint either.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Absolutely recycle metals

You don’t need to; all trash, no matter the bin, goes under a magnet that will pick out anything ferromagnetic, and through an induction trap that will pick out non-ferromagnetic metals. Even if for some reason it gets dumped in a landfill, it’s still possible to mine it out.

Aluminum in particular is more expensive to mine+refine than to recycle. Some places you can even throw it on the ground, and someone will pick it up to sell for recycling. Copper you can get even stolen from you, and don’t start me on Palladium, some people will “recycle” the catalytic converter from your car if you don’t park it in a safe place.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

Luckily many people live in democracies where they can simply vote to enact climate policies.

Sadly most people living in those democracies choose to continue enabling climate change.

The reason nothing is being done against climate change isn’t corrupt politicians. It’s the millions of people voting for them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

Lol, no.

The fault lies with those who built and benefit from the system, not those trapped in it who are merely given the illusion of choice.

Get off your high horse and aim your anger at the right people, otherwise all you are doing is enabling their rigged system.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Your first link is US only, your second link is about a completely seperate issue. You don’t need to dismantle capitalism to protect the climate.

In Germany, where I live, the voters could easily vote for the greens “Grüne” and the left “Linke”.

If those two parties had a majority in government, we’d have a climate friendly system in no time.

But they don’t. We had a conservative government for 16 years. Now we have a center government, which sadly includes the small government / free market party “FDP”, blocking all significant progress.

No systemic oppression stops people from voting Left/Greens. But they never did, and never will.

There’s now an uprise of the far right party “AfD” in Germany, to the point it’s becoming one of the major parties.

In Germany people have the choice readily available to stop actively damaging the climate.

But every couple of years, they freely choose to not do that.

I feel like many left-wing people regularly forget about the billions of people who genuinely do not care to do anything about climate change.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Most people don’t have a ‘green’ option for which they can vote.

We won’t touch the Greenbelt.

-Doug Ford, 2018

Ford says he’s confident nothing criminal took place in Greenbelt land swap amid RCMP probe.

-CBC news, 2023

Not that he was a green leaning politician to begin with but this is just another example of blatant lies used by politicians to get elected and totally fuckover their country.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

I do not believe the majority of people don’t know about the effects of climate change. I believe that the majority of people voting against climate friendly policies simply choose to not think long term.

Someone who votes to continue the status quo is to be blamed for the status quo.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

We must elect a Supreme Chancellor to get us through these tough times.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

No they can’t? If it was as simple as voting for green policies we’d see more of them. The only thing people can do is vote for greenwashed policies that do not impact the bottom line of industry.

permalink
report
parent
reply
96 points

I live next to this coal mine and the wind farm is on my monthly Autobahn trip right next to me. Maybe to shed some light on the “why”:

The coal mine was scheduled to be mined until 2038. The plan was to extend the mine to the west, the wind farm is to the east of the coal mine. RWE of course has big investments into mining this lignite until the very last possible day. There are problems with extending to the west though: old towns still exist there and the residents would of course love to stay in their homes the family had for generations. To the east, where the wind farm is, there is nothing but fields and some wind turbines. There are about 150 turbines in the wind farm and ~15 of them are standing where the mine is extending to now. Those 15 also were the first to be built for the wind farm and they are nearly at the end of their lifespan, some of them are even deemed structurally unsafe.

Of course it would be better to stop mining the lignite but decades ago the contracts with RWE were made and just forcing a company out of a contract that is worth billions of Euros is extremely bad precedent and would hinder future investions. Buying out the contract to cease mining faster also was not possible, because RWE was unwilling to settle for a reasonable sum of money.

permalink
report
reply
30 points
*

What a beautiful society where companies have more powers than an state…

Ofc theses companies have our futurs in mind, right ?

Capitalism.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

They don’t have more power - the government was just stupid to give them contracts this longlasting

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

Thinking of that one us city that sold its parking rights for a century for just millions

Also the many private-partnered public infrastructure projects built in Turkey with billing rights given to the companies that will let Erdoğans friends leech off the public for decades even if he loses political power

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

They don’t have more power than the state. The state could easily legislate any demands they want. Do so though and you end up rapidly like Venezuela. Contacts matter. Unless you think the state should be able to take your house with little to no compensation as well? That is not capitalism. Don’t be obtuse.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

It’s really bad for $$ to do the responsible thing, so we’re going to proceed with existential environmental degradation. Because $.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

To be completely honest (and I am a huge anti-coal-mining dude), currently I’m happy that we still have the coalmines running. It would not have been possible to build solar and wind power fast enough to compensate for the coalmines, the only feasible alternative would have been gas and that comes from russia

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Or to have kept your nuclear running and not freaked out after the fukushima disaster…

Just saying

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Correct. You can add the vastly underestimated methane emissions of natural gas to that. (They are hard to measure but nobody seems toooo interested)

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Maybe nuclear could’ve been better than coal?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Germany is still going to use the same amount of coal whether this runs or not, they’d just import it from another country or have another mine go faster if there’s one that still can

The way to reduce coal is to increase low carbon sources of energy and to reduce consumption

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Nope. Dont import and scarsity will drive prices up and people use less. It’s pretty simple really.

We need to keep all fossil fuels in the ground. The way we do this is reduce energy usage.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Do you really think it’s more responsible to force the families out of their homes and demolish several villages/towns over some old wind turbines? Or did you mean the responsible thing being investing in renewables? I really can’t tell, sorry 😅

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Obviously the latter

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It’s more responsible to stop mining fossil fuels.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Why was the plan to ever extent to the wist if there is a town?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

A lot of towns have been dug away for the lignite. The town now not digged away is just one of the few surviving ones. Also a lot of towns have been drowned for water storage lakes and Hydropower. Europe is populated way too densely to do any large infrastructure project without destroying towns in some ways. The residents are compensated with huge amounts of money, but for some they would still rather stay in the homes they have lived in for 50-80 years.

In this case the original plan was to move westwards because that’s where the coal lies in the ground. The lignite in the west is enough to keep the power plants running until 2050, the lignite in the east only until 2030. Because the date is now pushed forwards, it’s feasible to dig to the east. Also advanced technology plays a role: the original plans destroying the westwards towns were made when there was no technology to efficiently burn the lignite on the east, which is way less dense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Thanks for your insight.

permalink
report
parent
reply
78 points

So, if I’m reading this correctly, this is the Konigshovener Hohe wind farm which is built on the site of the Garzweiler open-pit lignite mine. According to this article, the site was inaugurated in 2015 with 21 Senvion turbines.

The problem is, Senvion went out of business in 2019, and customers have been struggling to support their turbines. Apparently the Senvion design is exceptionally dependent on software access. Siemens and others have stepped in to offer support contracts to Senvion turbines in good working order, but with the opportunity to mine more lignite at the site, maybe RWE felt that it was time to spin down the Senvion turbines.

It seems like there may be many factors in this decision.

permalink
report
reply
14 points

Thanks for providing this context. From what you say it sounds like a bad initial decision from RWE - tieing themselves in to 'wind turbine as a service’doesn’t seem sensible.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

We should be using open source solutions for things like energy security. It’s not like our civilization can run without energy generation. The control ought to be in the hands of people, not corporations.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yeah the Senvion situation is an object lesson in the dangers of proprietary systems.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

I’m not sure that’s the right wind farm. According to this guardian article, it’s actually the Keyenberg wind farm that’s being dismantled, a retired site from 2001.

Apparently the site is retired because the operator’s permit ends in 2023. Making way eventually for the mine expansion was part of the original deal allowing the land to be used for wind turbines, and so it’s not indicative of any change in climate policy from the German government. Additionally the turbines are somewhat outdated, having only a sixth of the power output of a modern one. They would have to tear down and modernise the turbines anyway even if not for the mine.

However from a publicity standpoint it’s not an ideal move. Could have given up on the lignite and put new wind turbines in instead, perhaps.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

I’m not sure if that is the wind farm. Looking at the article photos, there are a lot of turbines in the area, so there is probably more than one wind farm adjacent to the coal mine. Even with Senvion out of business, it still feels far too early for them to be pulling down turbines - normally they have about 30 years’ life in them before they’re sold on to another country. However, the article also says they’re only pulling down 7 turbines, so even if it is the same wind farm they’re not fully dismantling it.

Edit: Actually I think you’re right about the site. It looks like it might be these turbines they’re pulling down, and I imagine the motorcross site could be included in the project also.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yeah, but look up the story on the Senvion turbines. Basically, Senvion operators have had to pay big money for service contracts with 3rd parties since Senvion went out of business.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!worldnews@lemmy.ml

Create post

News from around the world!

Rules:

  • Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc

  • No NSFW content

  • No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

Community stats

  • 5.3K

    Monthly active users

  • 9.9K

    Posts

  • 113K

    Comments