Experts puzzled the EU with the amount needed to abandon Russian energy sources


Analyzing Europe's large-scale REPowerEU program, designed to ensure Europe's independence from energy carriers in general and from Russian ones in particular, the experts came to a disappointing conclusion. The EU will need an astronomical sum to replace gas, oil and coal. Rystad Energy experts have calculated that the successful implementation of the European plan will require several years of serious investment and the construction of infrastructure facilities at wartime speed.


Leaving aside purely bureaucratic and organizational decisions, such as accelerating the adoption and implementation of programs, developing documentation and theoretical support, the rest of the grand program will cost the EU one trillion dollars. It was this amount that puzzled the leadership of the European Union the experts of this company. Only with an investment of at least a trillion dollars will it be possible in the coming years to abandon Russian energy sources.

The experts calculated the cost of one megawatt of electricity from photovoltaic panels (1,1 million euros), and identified the need for 200 GW of additional solar energy and batteries, in addition to the 139 GW of solar energy conversion capacity already built over the years. This immediate goal alone (until 2030) will require more than $820 billion.

Ultimately, the experts calculated a huge number of other factors depending on the implementation time, so for economics It turns out cheaper for the Old World to continue to receive energy from the Russian Federation. Actually, all activities are aimed at maintaining and developing the industry, while its green direction as a whole becomes an end in itself, moreover, it does not guarantee results.

For the economy and society, the real energy sector is more profitable, more useful than ephemeral windmills and the incredible 300 billion already issued for their construction in the form of loans from European banks. In this sense, green and renewable energy, as well as independence from fuel and gas imports from Russia, will cost too much for the EU macro economy. Any rational sense of such a step, especially such a desperate and decisive one, is simply lost.

However, despite the stunning estimates of experts, it is unlikely that there will be fewer supporters of green energy diversification in the EU leadership. The point is that Brussels is pursuing the goal of a carbon-free economy out of pure principle and not out of real necessity.
  • Photos used: pixabay.com
6 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. zzdimk Offline zzdimk
    zzdimk 26 May 2022 09: 17
    -1
    The blue dream is to get rid of the blue fuel...
  2. Akuzenka Offline Akuzenka
    Akuzenka (Alexander) 26 May 2022 10: 55
    0
    In this sense, green and renewable energy, as well as independence from fuel and gas imports from Russia, will cost too much for the EU macro economy. Any rational sense of such a step, especially such a desperate and decisive one, is simply lost.

    That's not a pity at all. They want to become finally and unconditionally a rug for wiping American boots - I just applaud. No, I understand that they are simultaneously making "cannon fodder" for the next solution to the "Russian question". Well, they should understand it. It's not as difficult as it seems to me. Although, they may not think at all what it threatens them with. Anyway, opening their eyes to it is useless. They will not see or hear, as happened hundreds of times.
  3. Vladimir Golubenko (Vladimir Golubenko) 26 May 2022 12: 13
    0
    The goal is idiotic. There is no evidence of the environmental friendliness of green energy. Another bait to refuse Russian supplies. But!!! Counted - wept. Although it would be nice for Russia if they continue their course towards green energy. Russia will then leave them ahead for centuries!
  4. Andrey Nazarov Offline Andrey Nazarov
    Andrey Nazarov (Andrej Nazarov) 26 May 2022 16: 53
    0
    And there were windmills, and hydraulic motors .., but there were much fewer people (s), with the transition to hydrocarbons, there was a rapid breakthrough, because ... So after that, don't believe in the machinations of the backstage dreaming of a "golden billion".
  5. dub0vitsky Offline dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky (Victor) 26 May 2022 22: 14
    0
    The experts calculated the cost of one megawatt of electricity from photovoltaic panels (1,1 million euros), and identified the need for 200 GW of additional solar energy and batteries, in addition to the 139 GW of solar energy conversion capacity already built over the years. This immediate goal alone (until 2030) will require more than $820 billion.

    Dear Author, please specify what value you are talking about. The fact is that electrical energy is estimated not in Watts, kilowatts, etc.) but in Watt-hours. Solar energy falling at noon, on a cloudless day, onto the surface carries about 1,2 kilowatts of power per 1 meter². From which the solar panel, having an efficiency of 23% MAXIMUM (!) Can pump out only 23%, and for a short time. There's also the USE factor. The panel does not work at night. Statistics say that this coefficient is 20% Total - 0,2 * 0, 23 = 0,05. The total removal of electrical energy by the panel = 5%.
  6. dub0vitsky Offline dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky (Victor) 26 May 2022 22: 28
    0
    YOU are mistaken in thinking that carbon-free energy is a principle. It is, in fact, economics. They are going to impose a carbon tax on countries that have adopted all the dirty technologies from enlightened Europe. The Europeans are going to live in a clean world around them and tear three skins from those that generate this comfort for them. Russia will be a source of energy for a long time to come, and in order to discourage these strategists from wanting to live well and at someone else's expense, include THREE carbon taxes in the prices of all these energy carriers and energy itself. No less. And let them pay for the comfort, which will become extremely expensive for them. There should be no cheap energy.