|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
legrande
Joined: 23 Nov 2010
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:01 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Sounds good to me. There should be no state funding such things. Coal power is by far the best source available. Not only is it abundant, cheap and effective, but with the latest technology it is also quite clean. The only real 'waste' generated, CO2, is good for the ecosystem as well, as an added bonus. Other sustainable technologies can be implemented over time, but only if there is a consumer demand for it (ie. not at the taxpayer's expense).
Japan also has some of the best clean-coal technology on the planet. Building nuclear plants by the ocean, on fault lines is just plain folly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 1:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
The German economy is all but doomed to collapse faster than a lawn chair with Rosie O'Donnell on it, thus its energy policy matters little.
�Germany�s working-age population is likely to decrease 30 per cent over the next few decades,� says Steffen Kr�hnert of the Berlin Institute for Population Development. �Rural areas will see a massive population decline and some villages will simply disappear�Germany will become a weak economic power in the future.�
You look at those old speeches of der F�hrer roaring on about Germany�s need for �lebensraum.� Few people have ever needed it less.
When Barack Obama started redistributing American wealth, a lot of readers dusted off Mrs. Thatcher�s bon mot: �The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people�s money.� But European social democracy has taken it to the next level: they�ve run out of other people, period.
http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/06/03/beating-swords-into-welfare-cheques/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ^ and yet somehow I think the Germans will be better off 20 years from now than the French or the Brits... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoholDiver
Joined: 03 Oct 2009
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 4:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wow, this is the first I have heard of Germany doomsday stories. I have been hearing that it is the healthiest economy is Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johnnyenglishteacher2
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
The German economy is all but doomed to collapse faster than a lawn chair with Rosie O'Donnell on it, thus its energy policy matters little.
�Germany�s working-age population is likely to decrease 30 per cent over the next few decades,� says Steffen Kr�hnert of the Berlin Institute for Population Development. �Rural areas will see a massive population decline and some villages will simply disappear�Germany will become a weak economic power in the future.�
You look at those old speeches of der F�hrer roaring on about Germany�s need for �lebensraum.� Few people have ever needed it less.
|
Unless immigrants come in to make up the numbers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 4:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
Sounds good to me. There should be no state funding such things. Coal power is by far the best source available. Not only is it abundant, cheap and effective, but with the latest technology it is also quite clean. The only real 'waste' generated, CO2, is good for the ecosystem as well, as an added bonus. Other sustainable technologies can be implemented over time, but only if there is a consumer demand for it (ie. not at the taxpayer's expense).
Japan also has some of the best clean-coal technology on the planet. Building nuclear plants by the ocean, on fault lines is just plain folly. |
Cheaper, but I'm not sure about safer.
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html
Energy Source Death Rate (deaths per TWh)
Coal � world average 161 (26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)
Coal � China 278
Coal � USA 15
Oil 36 (36% of world energy)
Natural Gas 4 (21% of world energy)
Biofuel/Biomass 12
Peat 12
Solar (rooftop) 0.44 (less than 0.1% of world energy)
Wind 0.15 (less than 1% of world energy)
Hydro 0.10 (europe death rate, 2.2% of world energy)
Hydro - world including Banqiao) 1.4 (about 2500 TWh/yr and 171,000 Banqiao dead)
Nuclear 0.04 (5.9% of world energy)
Try googling Thorium. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 5:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Its only a matter of time before Germany follows the lead of the Irish and Estonians and completely wipes The Greens from the political landscape.
http://en.rwi-essen.de/media/content/pages/publikationen/ruhr-economic-papers/REP_09_156.pdf
Economic Impacts from the Promotion of Renewable Energy Technologies � The German Experience
Abstract
| Quote: |
The allure of an environmentally benign, abundant, and cost-eff ective energy source has led an increasing number of industrialized countries to back public fi nancing of renewable energies. Germany�s experience with renewable energy promotion is often cited as a model to be replicated elsewhere, being based on a combination of farreaching energy and environmental laws that stretch back nearly two decades. This paper critically reviews the current centerpiece of this eff ort, the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG), focusing on its costs and the associated implications for job creation and climate protection. We argue that German renewable energy policy, and in particular the adopted feed-in tariff scheme, has failed to harness the market incentives needed to ensure a viable and cost-eff ective introduction of renewable energies
into the country�s energy portfolio. To the contrary, the government�s support mechanisms have in many respects subverted these incentives, resulting in massive expenditures that show little long-term promise for stimulating the economy, protecting the environment, or increasing energy security. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Axiom wrote: |
Cheaper, but I'm not sure about safer.
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html
Energy Source Death Rate (deaths per TWh)
Coal � world average 161 (26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)
Coal � China 278
Coal � USA 15
Oil 36 (36% of world energy)
Natural Gas 4 (21% of world energy)
Biofuel/Biomass 12
Peat 12
Solar (rooftop) 0.44 (less than 0.1% of world energy)
Wind 0.15 (less than 1% of world energy)
Hydro 0.10 (europe death rate, 2.2% of world energy)
Hydro - world including Banqiao) 1.4 (about 2500 TWh/yr and 171,000 Banqiao dead)
Nuclear 0.04 (5.9% of world energy)
Try googling Thorium. |
In terms of pollution there's no reason why clean coal would kill anyone; in fact it only serves enrich the atmosphere with beneficial CO2. Dirty Chinese coal plants, however probably do contribute to early deaths in many people. But I'm not advocating this.
Thorium sounds quite interesting though - I was just checking it out after reading your post in another thread. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| Axiom wrote: |
Cheaper, but I'm not sure about safer.
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html
Energy Source Death Rate (deaths per TWh)
Coal � world average 161 (26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)
Coal � China 278
Coal � USA 15
Oil 36 (36% of world energy)
Natural Gas 4 (21% of world energy)
Biofuel/Biomass 12
Peat 12
Solar (rooftop) 0.44 (less than 0.1% of world energy)
Wind 0.15 (less than 1% of world energy)
Hydro 0.10 (europe death rate, 2.2% of world energy)
Hydro - world including Banqiao) 1.4 (about 2500 TWh/yr and 171,000 Banqiao dead)
Nuclear 0.04 (5.9% of world energy)
Try googling Thorium. |
In terms of pollution there's no reason why clean coal would kill anyone; in fact it only serves enrich the atmosphere with beneficial CO2. Dirty Chinese coal plants, however probably do contribute to early deaths in many people. But I'm not advocating this.
Thorium sounds quite interesting though - I was just checking it out after reading your post in another thread. |
You will get no argument from me on the bolded part.
I think you will find the figures above include the loss of life in the extraction the resource and in this regard coal mines are dangerous places even in the developed world. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Germans have played their economy and foreign policy comparatively seamlessly for almost the entire past decade. They were bound to make a huge slip sooner or later. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legrande
Joined: 23 Nov 2010
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Axiom wrote: |
Its only a matter of time before Germany follows the lead of the Irish and Estonians and completely wipes The Greens from the political landscape.
http://en.rwi-essen.de/media/content/pages/publikationen/ruhr-economic-papers/REP_09_156.pdf
Economic Impacts from the Promotion of Renewable Energy Technologies � The German Experience
Abstract
| Quote: |
The allure of an environmentally benign, abundant, and cost-eff ective energy source has led an increasing number of industrialized countries to back public fi nancing of renewable energies. Germany�s experience with renewable energy promotion is often cited as a model to be replicated elsewhere, being based on a combination of farreaching energy and environmental laws that stretch back nearly two decades. This paper critically reviews the current centerpiece of this eff ort, the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG), focusing on its costs and the associated implications for job creation and climate protection. We argue that German renewable energy policy, and in particular the adopted feed-in tariff scheme, has failed to harness the market incentives needed to ensure a viable and cost-eff ective introduction of renewable energies
into the country�s energy portfolio. To the contrary, the government�s support mechanisms have in many respects subverted these incentives, resulting in massive expenditures that show little long-term promise for stimulating the economy, protecting the environment, or increasing energy security. |
|
Yes, it appears I was wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legrande
Joined: 23 Nov 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Axiom wrote: |
| Axiom wrote: |
Its only a matter of time before Germany follows the lead of the Irish and Estonians and completely wipes The Greens from the political landscape.
http://en.rwi-essen.de/media/content/pages/publikationen/ruhr-economic-papers/REP_09_156.pdf
Economic Impacts from the Promotion of Renewable Energy Technologies � The German Experience
Abstract
| Quote: |
The allure of an environmentally benign, abundant, and cost-eff ective energy source has led an increasing number of industrialized countries to back public fi nancing of renewable energies. Germany�s experience with renewable energy promotion is often cited as a model to be replicated elsewhere, being based on a combination of farreaching energy and environmental laws that stretch back nearly two decades. This paper critically reviews the current centerpiece of this eff ort, the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG), focusing on its costs and the associated implications for job creation and climate protection. We argue that German renewable energy policy, and in particular the adopted feed-in tariff scheme, has failed to harness the market incentives needed to ensure a viable and cost-eff ective introduction of renewable energies
into the country�s energy portfolio. To the contrary, the government�s support mechanisms have in many respects subverted these incentives, resulting in massive expenditures that show little long-term promise for stimulating the economy, protecting the environment, or increasing energy security. |
|
Yes, it appears I was wrong. |
Hey, at least you're man enough to fess up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
English Matt
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| johnnyenglishteacher2 wrote: |
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
The German economy is all but doomed to collapse faster than a lawn chair with Rosie O'Donnell on it, thus its energy policy matters little.
�Germany�s working-age population is likely to decrease 30 per cent over the next few decades,� says Steffen Kr�hnert of the Berlin Institute for Population Development. �Rural areas will see a massive population decline and some villages will simply disappear�Germany will become a weak economic power in the future.�
You look at those old speeches of der F�hrer roaring on about Germany�s need for �lebensraum.� Few people have ever needed it less.
|
Unless immigrants come in to make up the numbers. |
Which they are and in large numbers.
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/europe/news/article_1629987.php/Germany-experiences-first-increase-in-migration-in-five-years
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12362853
The economy grew by 3.6% last year (best year since reunification) and is expected to grow by 2.5-2.6% this year.
Unemployment in Germany, and in particular Berlin and the eastern Bundesl�nder is decreasing (again for the first time since reunification). It now stands at 6.1% according to the ILO.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d9d7a52e-5b88-11e0-b965-00144feab49a.html#axzz1IKAoANm6
http://www.thelocal.de/money/20100601-27567.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11838365
Inflation is running at 2.1% as opposed to the 4.4% in the UK.
The cost of living here is low, the salaries are high, there are plenty of jobs, lots of people moving here at the moment, the economy is surging ahead, 90% of the demand that is pushing the conomy forward is coming from domestic demand, full employment is once again something that people are talking about here. Plenty of people here are happy that the govt. has caved to popular opinion (and there was strong opposition to the continuation of these nuclear power stations way before Fukushima) and will be investing in and switching to renewable energy sources sooner than planned. Sorry Sergio, but I live here, you don't, and you have no idea what you are talking about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
