From: Ing Michael Artman, Quickborn
Date: 19 February 2011 23:03
Open letter to: http://www.greenpeace.de/
Hello dear friends of nature,
for a long time, I am a sustaining member and admirer of Greenpeace.
On 18 Of February, represent the official views of Greenpeace in HH evening paper regarding electric vehicles. I am sad that you repeat these negative opinions.
However, you are right. The German electricity mix encounter most e-cars "now" more CO2. You are also right that the engine was still much potential. But unfortunately you take the wrong conclusions. The combustion engine will always emit CO2, and in another 30 years, even if we already 100% renewable electricity have. In a few years of renewable electricity will be produced cheaper than conventional. Just then the electric car has to be there. The reduction potential is infinitely greater than any internal combustion engine. If you demonize the electric car now, it will not be available in time. Please do not hinder the development and motivation, even if they bring in a few years the fruit. The turning point comes sooner than you think.
addition, the changes in the energy sector in any case necessary and irreversible. Please provide all value to the retention of current (H2, CH4, redox flow, heat, cold, ...). For as the fluctuating renewable electricity sources to calculate and fully utilized. It also helps the electric car a little. The synergies are, the fossil fuels have never. The availability of electricity storage determines the extent of regenerative. The fluctuating energy plus storage is the solution. But this combination can quickly replace the long-serving monsters.
Desertec what Greenpeace also advocates is a stillborn, as well as CCS. (In 10 years no one will ever be so stupid as to build coal-fired power plants also do not. In China. Even the operation of the spinning black will be unprofitable.) Both technologies are too late. Both technologies are to be implemented by corporations. Both projects will reinforce centralism. Both projects, profits remove from society and focus on a few corporations.
particularly Desertec will create new dependencies. Particularly in Africa, it will be a new colonialism (= addiction).
All for a paltry 15% of electricity in the EU. Irresponsible!
The decentralization of power generation will prevent that. Whether through solar cells, solar thermal, biogas CHP, wind, water, Isolierprogramme in housing or anything else. Again, this is inevitable and must therefore - from the perspective of utility - can be prevented as long as possible.
The utilities have already implemented and in the background are very active - and successful, see "nuclear phase-out" see more stringent requirements for wind and solar energy (SDL bonus), height limits for wind turbines, see unjustified increases in electricity prices and buck-push on the solar cells, see rising profits, the last gasp or clearing.
I hope I could make you a little clear where the future must go.
Sincerely
Michael Artman
comments by Felix Staratschek:
electromobility tradition:
http://www.avg.info/ tram / train
http://www.sobus.net / O bus http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkutriebwagen
battery railcars
For health and environmental reasons, but the flows always take precedence:
http://www.zu-fuss-zur-schule.de/
http://www.mit-dem- rad-to-arbeit.de / The
for only the reader, Michael Artman, I met a cyclist and practicing the eco KHG Paderborn, of that which is necessary also practiced himself.
http://www.atomausstiegselbermachen.de/ - so that necessary e-Mobility is environmentally friendly.
Date: 19 February 2011 23:03
Open letter to: http://www.greenpeace.de/
Hello dear friends of nature,
for a long time, I am a sustaining member and admirer of Greenpeace.
On 18 Of February, represent the official views of Greenpeace in HH evening paper regarding electric vehicles. I am sad that you repeat these negative opinions.
However, you are right. The German electricity mix encounter most e-cars "now" more CO2. You are also right that the engine was still much potential. But unfortunately you take the wrong conclusions. The combustion engine will always emit CO2, and in another 30 years, even if we already 100% renewable electricity have. In a few years of renewable electricity will be produced cheaper than conventional. Just then the electric car has to be there. The reduction potential is infinitely greater than any internal combustion engine. If you demonize the electric car now, it will not be available in time. Please do not hinder the development and motivation, even if they bring in a few years the fruit. The turning point comes sooner than you think.
addition, the changes in the energy sector in any case necessary and irreversible. Please provide all value to the retention of current (H2, CH4, redox flow, heat, cold, ...). For as the fluctuating renewable electricity sources to calculate and fully utilized. It also helps the electric car a little. The synergies are, the fossil fuels have never. The availability of electricity storage determines the extent of regenerative. The fluctuating energy plus storage is the solution. But this combination can quickly replace the long-serving monsters.
Desertec what Greenpeace also advocates is a stillborn, as well as CCS. (In 10 years no one will ever be so stupid as to build coal-fired power plants also do not. In China. Even the operation of the spinning black will be unprofitable.) Both technologies are too late. Both technologies are to be implemented by corporations. Both projects will reinforce centralism. Both projects, profits remove from society and focus on a few corporations.
particularly Desertec will create new dependencies. Particularly in Africa, it will be a new colonialism (= addiction).
All for a paltry 15% of electricity in the EU. Irresponsible!
The decentralization of power generation will prevent that. Whether through solar cells, solar thermal, biogas CHP, wind, water, Isolierprogramme in housing or anything else. Again, this is inevitable and must therefore - from the perspective of utility - can be prevented as long as possible.
The utilities have already implemented and in the background are very active - and successful, see "nuclear phase-out" see more stringent requirements for wind and solar energy (SDL bonus), height limits for wind turbines, see unjustified increases in electricity prices and buck-push on the solar cells, see rising profits, the last gasp or clearing.
I hope I could make you a little clear where the future must go.
Sincerely
Michael Artman
comments by Felix Staratschek:
electromobility tradition:
http://www.avg.info/ tram / train
http://www.sobus.net / O bus http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkutriebwagen
battery railcars
For health and environmental reasons, but the flows always take precedence:
http://www.zu-fuss-zur-schule.de/
http://www.mit-dem- rad-to-arbeit.de / The
for only the reader, Michael Artman, I met a cyclist and practicing the eco KHG Paderborn, of that which is necessary also practiced himself.
http://www.atomausstiegselbermachen.de/ - so that necessary e-Mobility is environmentally friendly.
0 comments:
Post a Comment