Enlarge image
Solar park: The prices, especially for wind and solar power, have been in free fall for many years
Photo: Sven-Erik Arndt / Universal Images Group via Getty Images
In each of the three trials for the federal election, in different formulations, the same, unfortunately extremely stupid, question was asked over and over again. In short, it goes something like this: It will all be incredibly expensive with climate protection, right? The moderators really dogged themselves into this topic, demanding confessions, confessions and disclosure of the terrible things that allegedly threaten us when we finally get serious about converting our energy supply.
Unfortunately, it has to be said so clearly that this question has only been asked once, an expression of a widespread journalistic failure.
The moderation teams were simply not up to date, especially when it came to the climate issue.
Perhaps they really had the feeling that if all the weather disasters of 2021 are already campaigning for the Greens, then we will at least have to counter, who knows.
The fact is that the question “What does climate protection cost?” Has been proven to be wrong.
The correct question is: "What will it cost if we continue not to do climate protection?" Because that will be really expensive.
And not just because of the damage that the climate crisis is already causing.
Don't believe me, believe the ecophobia of unsuspicious institutions like the European Central Bank, Oxford University or the Bloomberg news agency.
All three have recently published studies that are crystal clear on one point and completely agree: It is expensive not to act.
And it gets more and more expensive the longer you wait.
Those who switch quickly, on the other hand, can look forward to sensational savings.
Not only in CO2, but also in euros.
more on the subject
Lax red gold: Germany's five deadly sins - and how we can do it better
The sooner the world finally wakes up, says goodbye to fossil fuels and covers its energy supply with electricity from sun, wind and hydropower, the cheaper it will be. And not only because climate protection can prevent future catastrophes that will cause extreme damage.
But also because - already now!
- In many places, electricity from renewable energy sources is cheaper than dirty electricity.
Also with us.
Here is a sentence from Bloomberg's unit, which specializes in renewable energies (BNEF): "In countries including China, India and Germany, it is now cheaper to build a new, large solar power plant than to continue operating an existing coal-fired or gas-fired power plant."
Did you notice that China no longer wants to build coal-fired power plants abroad?
There is a reason for this, and it also has to do with economic considerations.
In a study, the ECB also comes to the conclusion that no climate protection is significantly more expensive than climate protection, and the dramatically falling costs of renewable energies are not even fully factored in there: “The results show that acting quickly offers clear advantages: the short-term costs of the transition pale in comparison to the medium and long-term costs of unchecked climate change. «In addition, rapid political action brings additional advantages, because efficient technologies would be available more quickly.
In fact, the prices for wind and solar power in particular have been in free fall for many years, and as a journalist you could really know that in 2021.
A study from Oxford shows, however, that this fact is consistently ignored even in the current models for energy management: “A quick transition to green energy supply would probably save trillions of dollars - even if one considers the damage caused by climate change and other benefits of climate protection not included. "
more on the subject
Climate strike before the federal election: Greta Thunberg is not voting enoughBy Jonas Schaible
For many years, companies, but also researchers who deal with these questions, have repeatedly made completely wrong forecasts for future price developments, as the study shows.
It is only a working paper, but the figures speak for themselves even without a peer review: For example, studies repeatedly claim new lower price limits that one megawatt hour of solar or wind power can allegedly not fall below.
And again and again the exponentially falling price breaks through these supposed lower limits completely unchecked.
Many previous studies have suffered from arbitrary and, retrospectively, proven incorrect assumptions.
advertisement
Stocker, Christian
We are the experiment: Our world is changing so breathtakingly that we stagger from crisis to crisis.
We have to learn to manage this tremendous acceleration.
Published by Karl Blessing Verlag
Number of pages: 384
Published by Karl Blessing Verlag
Number of pages: 384
Buy for € 22.00
Price inquiry time
09/26/2021 2:14 p.m.
No guarantee
Order from Amazon
Order from Thalia
Order from Weltbild
Product reviews are purely editorial and independent.
Via the so-called affiliate links above, we usually receive a commission from the dealer when making a purchase.
More information here
Last year I published a book whose last chapter is called "Only the exponential function can save us" for this very reason.
Now it turns out that it is already starting.
"A slower transition (which provides for slower conversion rates than the currently prevailing) is more expensive, and a transition based on nuclear energy is much more expensive," say the Oxford authors.
It is high time that the debate about the absolutely inevitable conversion of our energy supply is finally no longer based on fictions that only benefit the coal, oil and gas industries.
The stupid question asked again and again about the "costs" of the energy transition is a success of ruthless fossil lobbyism.
In fact, the current price of carbon is far from reflecting the real costs that the crisis is already causing.
And yet the same applies to climate protection: if you brake, you lose.
And last but not least, a huge amount of money.
