alt Hacker NewsYes, energy is more expensive than when Europe received favorable fossil gas prices from Russia (as the Ember graphs demonstrate) prior to the Russo-Ukrainian war. Europe is not going back to Russia for energy. Europe has sufficient domestic renewable and low carbon (nuclear, hydro) energy potential to achieve a similar "energy cost ratio" as they previously achieved when cheap Russian fossil gas was procured. Europe will experience elevated energy prices until they have deployed enough renewables and storage to achieve historical energy costs.
How long it takes for Europe to achieve this outcome is a capital investment and deployment velocity decision. The capital exists, the technology and manufacturing capacity exists. How competitive does Europe want to be from a manufacturing perspective? The answer to that is the speed at which they drive down energy costs using the various technologies I've enumerated.
I've reached out to an Ember contact to inquire if they could communicate this time window and velocity in some fashion on their graphs for Europe ("time to historical energy price levels via energy transition").
We had positive announcements like these 40 years ago, ways before Nord Stream was even planned, when Natural Gas was the future and households converted to Natural Gas heating.
It seems very unlikely that with sustained temperatures of -5 to -8°C in the winter months, which seem to get longer again, heating can be achieved with renewables in any way.
Heat pumps were already collapsing and making irritating fan noises at -8° this winter. Converting to heat pumps is expensive and the service costs are expensive, too.
LNG is needed for fertilizer and other chemical products, too and is hard to replace at all.
By all means, try renewables, but these enthusiasm waves leave me skeptical.