ᐅ Implications of the Coalition Agreement for Home Builders?

11ant schrieb:

Everyone, seriously, using a bit of common sense wouldn’t hurt: currently, unused energy should be pooled more efficiently rather than temporarily taken out of circulation and wasted by being transported around pointlessly. The fact that the transport vehicle also consumes some of this energy only makes this nonsense slightly less problematic. We should go back to acting thoughtfully instead of being driven by subsidy incentives!

Your post is just full of such helpful suggestions. 🙄

AllThumbs schrieb:

Your post is just full of better suggestions. 🙄

Oh yes – if you can (and want to) read:
Turning your brain on is one of the most sensible suggestions ever.
And currently unutilized energy should be pooled more effectively than being temporarily taken out of circulation and senselessly transported around picks up several important points at once:
1) it recognizes the problem and the legitimate need for load balancing in the grid;
2) it points out that the stored energy is not accessible from the pool while it is being transported;
3) it highlights that the energy stored in the transport vehicle only partly performs useful work there and partly (inevitably not without losses—and possibly multiple times) is just moved back and forth;
and those capable of thinking in reverse can:
deduce from 1) that further consideration of storage solutions is useful, even though the idea of using a car battery for purposes unrelated to driving is nonsense;
deduce from 2) that suitable storage systems should always have the capability to communicate with the “main grid” (or fixed grid);
deduce from 3) that energy temporarily stored for smoothing the grid should be kept closer to its next users.

Should I have made it clearer that turning your brain on must be recognized as the key to continuing to read, otherwise comments like

AllThumbs schrieb:

Your post is just full of better suggestions. 🙄

are unfortunately quite likely?

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

11ant schrieb:

Folks, seriously, using a bit of common sense wouldn’t hurt: currently, unused energy would be better pooled efficiently rather than being taken temporarily out of circulation and senselessly transported around. The fact that the transport vehicle itself consumes some of this energy just makes this nonsense slightly less absurd. We should go back to making decisions based on reason rather than on subsidies!

This is exactly what the idea of using electric vehicles as load balancing is about. At the moment, renewable energy is taken off the grid so that polluting power plants can maintain their baseload output. Instead of shutting down wind turbines or converting the energy into heat through ground probes (which sounds and is perverse), a swarm storage system can help reduce the baseload of these polluting plants and allow more renewable energy from existing wind and solar power plants to be used. The fact that this swarm storage is also mobile, becomes a household utility, and is privately financed is an advantage for rapid adoption.
I find this quite logical and positive—acknowledging that this is not the solution that should last for the next 30 years, because mobility itself needs to be rethought—and recognizing that there are indeed questions regarding the sustainability and efficiency of current batteries.

The subsidies are meant to “harness” greed so that purposeful, climate-friendly actions take place. Unfortunately, we tend to switch off our brains when doing the right thing seems too expensive.

Certainly, two people using their brains may arrive at different assessments and solutions. Accusing each other of stupidity doesn’t lead anywhere.

hampshire schrieb:

Certainly, two people who think for themselves can come to different assessments and solutions. Accusing each other of stupidity leads nowhere.

That is why I preferred to present miscalculations. You have approached the issue differently than I have and arrived at a different conclusion – that is different from completely overlooking the points in my post and, in a way, denying that there are any at all. That pleases me.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

Ysop*** schrieb:

That’s a charming daydream, but I don’t think you want to deal with heritage preservation restrictions 🙂

Since I’ve been trying to furnish a timber frame house or imagine hanging things on the walls (so far only in my mind), I can hardly believe that heritage protection would be more restrictive. ;-) But maybe I’m wrong about timber frame construction. Time will tell with practical matters like awnings, shutters, outdoor lights, front door canopies, etc. I’ll report back then.

I find it somewhat frustrating that house manufacturers rarely provide concrete information on how much weight you can hang on the walls... they tend to avoid giving specific statements or examples.

Hangman schrieb:

I’m confused, you want to exchange your house before you’ve even broken ground?

If we find something “old,” perhaps with thick sandstone walls or an old barn or similar, we’d consider it. At the peak of our search, nothing like that was available in our desired area, so we’re building new. We still really like our old house from the 1950s, and as I may have already mentioned several times, it had very beautiful details that we can’t afford in a new build.

11ant schrieb:


derived from 1),
derived from 2),
derived from 3),

Alright, I conclude that you don’t have a proposal for a technical solution.
With decentralized energy generation, it absolutely makes sense to store energy locally as well. That doesn’t mean that surplus energy can no longer be fed into the grid at all, or that my house would be left in the dark if the car is in the workshop.
You would probably rather prefer to fill the cooling towers of decommissioned coal power plants with battery storage so that we can pool everything centrally.