Most of the misinformation communities are easy to spot, but [email protected] falls into a slightly different category, and it presents itself in an unusual way. It seems like one of the main mods flavors his postings with a consistent sprinkling of posts that say that Europe not buying fossil fuels from Russia is a catastrophe for Europe, and they must reverse course as soon as possible and stop trying to depend on renewable energy, since it doesn’t work.
Here are some examples from a most recent post. It’s far from the only post that includes this general shape and character, but it’s particularly on the nose. From https://lemm.ee/post/49292464:
That will leave Europe with expensive LNG from Qatar and the US, as well as some pipeline gas from Norway and through Turkiye, which is Russian gas in a roundabout, third-party way. As always: higher complexity comes at a higher price — a direct consequence of the EU’s economic war on its largest energy supplier.
With the predictable unpredictability of wind and solar, however, and with a massive reliance on natural gas fired power plants to balance electricity demand, Europe has just saw the fastest drop in natural gas storage in years. Yes, the weather was cold in the past couple of weeks, but it wasn’t nearly as cold as it could get in the dead of winter. Wind on the other hand stopped blowing, which not only resulted in lower electricity generation from wind turbines, but also in thicker clouds and more persistent fog… Leading to a much diminished solar power generation. Welcome to the good old Dunkelflaute (or the dark doldrums) so common this time of year, and by the way sometimes throughout the entire winter… Who could have thought that “renewables” produce much less electricity during wintertime…?
Whenever a large solar farm returns production it sends a shock wave through the grid, damaging sensitive equipment nearby. Similarly, when a cloud suddenly blocks the Sun a micro-blackout could occur (lasting a few milliseconds) till back up capacity comes online. These fluctuations in the supply of electricity has forced many companies with sensitive manufacturing equipment to install surge protectors and uninterruptible power supply units costing tens or hundreds of thousands of Euros (depending on size) or outright buying a natural gas powered generation unit to produce their own stable electricity supply.
In the meantime, and just for the record, the IMF has just named Russia the 4th largest economy of the world, surpassing Japan and Germany; after the World Bank classified it as a high income country. Despite all protestations, sanctions actually helped Russia rein in its worst oligarchs and encouraged investments to replace lost imports. Contrary to what Europe’s ruling elite had in mind, their policy has lead to a huge economic boom in Russia, driven by internal consumption and powered by an abundant supply of fossil fuels.
I asked the mod about what was up with this, on an earlier post, and they didn’t seem to have much of a response other than an appeal to authority. (https://lemm.ee/post/49069993)
Obviously, I could be right or wrong, and no one’s obligated to answer my questions about anything, but at that point I was looking at it as “You may be unintentionally posting misinformation” and warning the person, and their response didn’t line up for me with someone who is innocently posting informative content because they believe it to be true.
I agree that it’s odd that a collapse community (presumably pro-environment?) post would argue for using more fossil fuels instead of renewables, but looking at it from a strictly economic perspective, my understanding is that Europe not buying natural gas from Russia is indeed severely affecting their economy.
That part is completely accurate, yes. What I was referring to was more the idea that they need to go back to buying Russian fuel, because solar panels are destroying their electrical grid, and the Russian economy is doing great because sanctions actually helped it enormously. That, and also the mod’s total disinterest in discussing the topic when I pointed out some of the suspect elements of the stuff he was posting.
But from what I understand, those things you listed are all at least partly true, from a strictly economic perspective. I agree that it’s a poorly thought-out opinion from an environmental / climate perspective though.
That’s not “at least partly true.” It’s the steamingest pile of pure bullshit I’ve seen all week. I don’t know why you would seize on some vaguely half-true things near the beginning of the article to take the jump of claiming that the pants-on-fire part of it is “at least partly true.”
I was referring to your list I quoted in general, not that paragraph from the original post. That paragraph seems to make some sloppy claims without providing evidence, but the general opinion they’re expressing doesn’t seem completely out of the question to me. I had read before that Germany was not doing their green energy transition right and it was causing them to have to increase coal burning, which I’m sure everyone can agree is a bad thing. I did a quick search and here’s what appears to be a decent article about the issues with Germany’s approach to green energy: https://www.bakerinstitute.org/research/so-much-german-efficiency-warning-green-policy-aspirations
“Sloppy claims without providing evidence”? “The general opinion they’re expressing”?
Lol, okay. You’re welcome to your opinion.
?