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?

  • RagnarokOnline@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    104
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think this headline is misleading.

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

    • bouh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      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!

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

  • suction@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

  • DrM@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • TGhost [She/Her]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

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

      Ofc theses companies have our futurs in mind, right ?

      Capitalism.

      • hh93@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

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

        • Lojcs@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          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

    • library_napper@monyet.cc
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

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

      • Firnin@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        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 😅

  • TWeaK@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s an old wind farm that would be due being taken down. Wind turbines have a finite life span, they oscillate slightly and this loosens the ground around the base, so after around 30 years they’re taken down. Typically they end up being sold to poorer countries where they’re installed on a new base.

  • DessertStorms@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    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.

    • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • DessertStorms@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        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?

        • Gadg8eer@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The wind farm (singular) they’re tearing down have been abandoned for 4 years now because the company that owned them went bust; bad placement was apparently to blame for these specific windmills being useless, doesn’t mean they’re 100% switching back to coal.

          Also, I think they’d move the windmills if it is at all possible to not scrap them.

    • napoleonsdumbcousin@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      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

      • DessertStorms@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • napoleonsdumbcousin@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          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.

      • prole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

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

        • maynarkh@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

    • smollittlefrog@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • DessertStorms@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • smollittlefrog@lemdro.id
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          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.

          • Harrison [He/Him]@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Under capitalism, the capitalist class controls the media, and can use their wealth to control the political class.

            A democracy can only make choices so far as it’s voters are informed, and when a group controls most sources of information, it can control the democracy as a whole.

          • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You don’t need to dismantle capitalism to protect the climate.

            You absolutely do. If it was profitable to destroy the envrionment capitalism would do it in a heartbeat. And guess what it IS profitable to destroy the environment, that is why it is happening! You cannot protect the environment under capitalism.

            • smollittlefrog@lemdro.id
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You can limit capitalism without abolishing it.

              In Germany people are guaranteed 20/24 paid vacation days. That’s not profitable.

              That’s a limit imposed on capitalism. It can be done and has been done without abolishing capitalism.

              That’s just one of the thousands of policies that limit capitalism.

              You can limit capitalism (as literally every capitalist nation does) without abolishing it.

              Enforcing climate friendlyness would be just another limit.

              • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                When you try to limit capitalism you get nuclear plants being shut down and coal plants being opened and the environment still being destroyed.

            • jarfil@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              When you try to dismantle capitalism… you get capitalism under a different name, with a dictator on top of it. Better hope the dictator wants to protect the environment, and that he knows how to! (see: Great Chinese Famine)

      • nik282000@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

      • kool_newt@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        But the millions of people have been denied education, mislead, and propagandized by the corrupt politicians, it’s probably not productive to blame victims here.

        • smollittlefrog@lemdro.id
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          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.

      • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

      • SSUPII@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        There is no rule that forces you to copy the real article’s name. In this cases you want to make your own title to spark better debate.

      • izzent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        This should be all that’s needed to invalidate the comment you’re replying to, but it seems people are dumb.

  • IHeartBadCode@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

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

    This is one of those in general vs in particular things.

    In general, yes coal is way more expensive versus renewable energy. In this particular instance, they’re just expanding the site, all of the really expensive stuff like logistics and transportation are already paid.

    This is the same reason just keeping old nuclear plants running is cheaper than building a new one. Each industry has expensive parts and cheap parts. If you’re doing something that only expands the cheap parts then you’ll be able to beat out competitors.

    • DrM@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Additionally those turbines are at the end of their lifespan. They would need to be dismantled and rebuilt anyways, since they became structurally unsafe

  • emmanuel_car@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    12ft paywall removed link

    The demolitions are part of a deal brokered last year between Robert Habeck, the Green party’s minister for economy and climate action and Mona Neubaur, who is the economy minister for North Rhine Westphalia, to allow the expansion of the mine.

    In return, RWE had to agree to phase out coal in 2030, eight years before the previous deadline. “It’s a good day for climate protection,” Habeck said at the time.

    What’s the timeline for getting this expansion built? And what’s the lifecycle of the plant? I understand there are energy scarcity concerns, but how is this the most economical option when it’s ~7 years until they’re supposed to phase out coal?

    • andrai@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      The wind turbines are already at the end of their lifespan and they knew RWE had the license to expand the mine there when the wind turbines where build.

      Of course it’s economical for RWE, they are not building a new mine. Just continuing their mining operation there for another 7 years.

      • Fosheze@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean, that’s probably actually it. Short term profits are all shareholders care about. We’ve seen that time and time again where businesses will absolutely mutilate themselves just so shareholders can enjoy a short term price spike. This is just a pump and dump but for the energy industry.

    • JJROKCZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most likely they have no intention of stopping coal production and will just move the deadline again in 2030 and no one will do anything about it.

      • TWeaK@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s possible, particularly if different parties are in power at that time. However the article also notes that lignite is becoming less economically viable and may need to be wound up anyway in 2030.

    • Not_mikey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m guessing their bracing for winter without Russian oil. Which will hopefully be transitory, but also sort of delays the inevitable. If they can’t survive a winter without fossil fuels they need to figure it out quick.

    • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      I suspect that they have no intention of phasing out coal, or there are certain unrealistic requirements that have to be met before the “agreement” to end coal is enforced. It’s just pageantry, Germany has no intention of ending coal dependence.

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      What’s misleading? There’s coal under these turbines, they’re being dismantled to expand the coal mine, ergo they’re being torn down for coal

      • R00bot@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is not the obvious interpretation, and the headline (and description added by OP) are deliberately written to imply something that’s not true.

  • Tarte@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    RWE has no conscience left at all (doubt they ever had one). Coal is scheduled to be faded out by 2030 (recently rescheduled from 2038) and I do wonder if there really was no other option than to demolish those 8 windmills (and the nearby village).

    That being said: This is a singular incident caused by long-time contracts of the fading industry. It’s not some paradigm shift in Germany. Coal will be gone soon and new windmills will be build.

  • CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

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

    The value is simply more densely packed in the coal under the wind farm than in the surface area of the wind farm.

  • jabrd [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Germany’s green energy push was secretly propped up by outsourcing fossil fuel needs to Russian natural gas. The war in Ukraine and America subsequently blowing up the Nordstream 2 pipeline means Germany will need to find new alternatives to feeding their energy needs. One could hope this results in a speed up of green tech development as it becomes more of a pressing necessity than just, you know, the right thing to do. And hey speaking of knowing the right thing to do and then not doing it because of the perverse economic incentives for ignoring it, it’s funny to note that the global leader in green tech is China but due to this new cold war the US is brewing and due to Germany’s newly-humbled-into role as Jr Junior partner to the US there’s no way there will be the necessary cooperation there between national tech sectors

        • pingveno@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I advise caution with Hersh’s reporting. It was weak to begin with, relying on a single source. It’s not improved at all since publication, with no one coming forward even anonymously to corroborate the claims. Seymour Hersh has published important stories, but he’s gotten sloppy with this one.

          • AreaSIX @lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes stranger on the internet, the most decorated investigative journalist alive has "gotten sloppy’ you say. So who’s more credible here, the guy who broke My Lai and Abu Ghraib, reported on Watergate and the secret bombing of Cambodia, won a Pulitzer and a record five Polk awards, or you, some anonymous commenter on the internet, laughably calling it “weak”, “cautioning” against it? You don’t think other bootlickers in the past have called his reports on My Lai, Cambodia or Abu Ghraib “weak”?

      • SeventyTwoTrillion [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        the only people trivializing fascism are those who see fascism symbology like the swastika, Black Sun, various nordic runes, etc on the soldiers they’re egging on and go “doesn’t look like anything to me!” while advocating for the double genocide theory

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Have you any pictures of Azov with swastika, black sun, or such after they got integrated into the national guard?

          Or is that just a convenient propaganda line to make you support an imperial aggressor fielding tons of fascist militias, itself being a mafia state slowly but surely turning fascist?

          • AcidSmiley [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Have you any pictures of Azov with swastika, black sun, or such since 2014?

            The Black Sun and Wolfsangel have been right on their fucking shit rag of a flag until last year, you fascist turd.

            JFC the entire first page of your comments is nothing but nazi apologia, fick dich du kranke Faschosau.

            • Adkml [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Hey rember when they just got those new leopard tanks and some rascal painted a bunch of iron crosses on them, which libs insisted was from obscure world War 1 battalion and not where literally everybody knows the iron cross from, to the point the German government said they weren’t gonna keep giving them weapons if that shit didn’t stop

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The black sun got removed in 2015, this is the new one. But, go on, spin random bullshit.

              JFC the entire first page of your comments is nothing but nazi apologia

              Yeah I happen to be arguing with another fascism-trivialising hexbear idiot in another thread.

    • notceps [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      It really isn’t Germany is subsidizing coal by 1.7bn € every year. Like all currently coal producing countries give huge subsidies to their coal industry because they’d just immediately shut down.