# Why is Spain so resistant to renewable energy?



## skip o (Aug 1, 2011)

It blows my mind that such a sunny country isn't leading the charge into solar, and then there is resistance to wind too:

"In 2008, the wind sector employed more than 40,000 people in Spain. Today, after a five-year freeze on green energy, employment has fallen by half."

Wind farms: Green energy: When Spain had the wind in its sails | In English | EL PAÍS


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

It's complicated - but basically down to private sector profitability. The traditional energy suppliers objected to the subsidies being given to renewables.

This article explains it well.

https://euobserver.com/regions/130408


----------



## bob_bob (Jan 5, 2011)

Plus most solar and wind generators don't work half the time. We need a lot more nuclear power stations.


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

Although investment ground to a halt under the PP government, Spain still generated 37% of its electricity from renewables in 2015.










Wind power	19.1%
Hydroelectric	11.1%
Solar PV 3.1%
Solar Thermal 2.1%
Renewable Thermal	2.0%

Total renewable 37.4%

In order to reach 2020 EU targets however, the government is reviewing its policy and we are likely to see further investment in renewables soon, including tidal.


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

bob_bob said:


> Plus most solar and wind generators don't work half the time. We need a lot more nuclear power stations.


Is that because we don't have enough sun or wind? Or because they keep breaking down? 

I am in Cadiz province which has the highest proportion of wind farms in the country. Believe me, there is no shortage of wind ...

Cádiz genera el 24% de la energía renovable que produce Andalucía


----------



## xgarb (May 6, 2011)

And there's plenty of flat roofs on flats and business premises that could have solar panels and solar water heating units fitted.

I hope in the future to see them on the roofs of the supermarkets around here with power points in the cars parks for people to charge their car while they shop.


----------



## bob_bob (Jan 5, 2011)

There are wind farms ruining the landscape all over South Wales, I often drive past one and see two or three of the @20 running.

Nuclear power is safe and clean.


----------



## xgarb (May 6, 2011)

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/537816/why-dont-we-have-more-nuclear-power/

But I don't disagree with you.. Modern technology nuclear can be safe, clean and reliable. Maybe in the future when better nuclear plants are built they can take down the wind farms without any effect on the environment. Not so easy with a hastily built, badly designed nuclear power plant.

Personally I think we should be looking to save energy with efficient design and capturing solar energy locally where possible.


----------



## joaquinx (Jul 3, 2010)

bob_bob said:


> Plus most solar and wind generators don't work half the time. We need a lot more nuclear power stations.


Solar doesn't work at night and wind doesn't work when it's not windy, right?


----------



## Pazcat (Mar 24, 2010)

joaquinx said:


> Solar doesn't work at night and wind doesn't work when it's not windy, right?


This is becoming more and more irrelevant as better battery storage becomes available.


----------



## xgarb (May 6, 2011)

joaquinx said:


> Solar doesn't work at night and wind doesn't work when it's not windy, right?


Yep.. you need something to generate a base load (ie nuclear) and something for the peaks which can be a combination of gas, hydro, solar and wind.


----------



## 95995 (May 16, 2010)

bob_bob said:


> There are wind farms ruining the landscape all over South Wales, I often drive past one and see two or three of the @20 running.
> 
> *Nuclear power is safe and clean*.


Except that *nobody yet knows how to deal with the waste *and no one can even say how much it would cost to effectively and safely decommission a nuclear power plant once it reaches end of life. So, supporters are effectively just putting all the problems in the laps of their children and many future generations. Oh, and transporting nuclear material is also unsafe.


----------



## Megsmum (Sep 9, 2012)

EverHopeful said:


> Except that *nobody yet knows how to deal with the waste *and no one can even say how much it would cost to effectively and safely decommission a nuclear power plant once it reaches end of life. So, supporters are effectively just putting all the problems in the laps of their children and many future generations. Oh, and transporting nuclear material is also unsafe.


That's the way now with most things, let your grandchildren worry about it, I'm alright Jack


----------



## xgarb (May 6, 2011)

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/903/coal-and-gas-are-far-more-harmful-than-nuclear-power/

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/feb/02/nuclear-reactors-consume-radioactive-waste

The problem at the moment with nuclear is crappy 70's technology. We should be encouraging research into fission and fusion sources of energy otherwise when the fossil fuels run out we'll be stuffed. https://phys.org/news/2016-11-future-nuclear-energy.html


----------



## gus-lopez (Jan 4, 2010)

Spain was the world leader in solar until Rajoys PP cut the "guaranteed for 25 years" feed in tariff, bankrupting many private individuals ,let alone companies, decimating the panel market forcing the chinese to dump them at low prices & putting the vast majority of the qualified installers out of business. 
Helpful for the UK though as the vast majority of the feed in tariff installations in the Uk from the south-west to the south -east over the last 4 years, have all been installed by spanish companies/workers. I met the same electrician in South Molton in 2013 & Ramsgate in 2016.:lol:

Add to that the requirement now, pushed for by the electric companies ,that users have to register for & pay tax on, the amount generated & fed back using the companies infrastructure. 
Even the EU is saying it goes against the legislation.


----------



## bob_bob (Jan 5, 2011)

EverHopeful said:


> Except that *nobody yet knows how to deal with the waste *and no one can even say how much it would cost to effectively and safely decommission a nuclear power plant once it reaches end of life. So, supporters are effectively just putting all the problems in the laps of their children and many future generations. Oh, and transporting nuclear material is also unsafe.


Do you actually know anything about real nuclear waste? I suggest you have no idea.


----------



## 95995 (May 16, 2010)

bob_bob said:


> Do you actually know anything about real nuclear waste? I suggest you have no idea.


I suspect it's you who has no idea! (I have worked in the industry, sad to say.)


----------



## bob_bob (Jan 5, 2011)

Another tree hugger


----------



## Pesky Wesky (May 10, 2009)

xgarb said:


> https://climate.nasa.gov/news/903/coal-and-gas-are-far-more-harmful-than-nuclear-power/
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/feb/02/nuclear-reactors-consume-radioactive-waste
> 
> The problem at the moment with nuclear is crappy 70's technology. We should be encouraging research into fission and fusion sources of energy otherwise when the fossil fuels run out we'll be stuffed. https://phys.org/news/2016-11-future-nuclear-energy.html


No, the problem as Gus says is political and in fact the turn against renewable energy actually started with the socialists, not the PP


----------



## mrryder99 (May 22, 2017)

I have a friend building a house near Sitges that will be pretty much self-sufficient...solar + batteries. The amount of sun here *should* make it a no-brainer...


----------



## mrryder99 (May 22, 2017)

mrryder99 said:


> I have a friend building a house near Sitges that will be pretty much self-sufficient...solar + batteries. The amount of sun here *should* make it a no-brainer...


On that note, does anyone know if you can get the Tesla batteries here?


----------



## Blanco53 (Mar 6, 2017)

EverHopeful said:


> Except that *nobody yet knows how to deal with the waste *and no one can even say how much it would cost to effectively and safely decommission a nuclear power plant once it reaches end of life. So, supporters are effectively just putting all the problems in the laps of their children and many future generations. Oh, and transporting nuclear material is also unsafe.


I agree there isn't a definitive solution. However when Sizewell A was decommissioned, an old style Magnox power station, it was asbestos that caused the most concern rather than anything else.


----------



## 95995 (May 16, 2010)

Blanco53 said:


> I agree there isn't a definitive solution. However when Sizewell A was decommissioned, an old style Magnox power station, it was asbestos that caused the most concern rather than anything else.


Asbestos is certainly a major issue. However, Sizewell A was shut down in 2006 and decommissioning is expected to take until 2027. Apparently 151,500 litres of radioactive water was found to have leaked from a split pipe in 2007. It seems they are planning to turn the Sizewell area into a massive nuclear waste dump  - which might be why there was less concern  And that *for at least 110 years *- no doubt they are hoping that some other solution will be available by then. In the meantime, keeping the waste safe will be a major issue.


----------



## Blanco53 (Mar 6, 2017)

EverHopeful said:


> Asbestos is certainly a major issue. However, Sizewell A was shut down in 2006 and decommissioning is expected to take until 2027. Apparently 151,500 litres of radioactive water was found to have leaked from a split pipe in 2007. It seems they are planning to turn the Sizewell area into a massive nuclear waste dump  - which might be why there was less concern  And that *for at least 110 years *- no doubt they are hoping that some other solution will be available by then. In the meantime, keeping the waste safe will be a major issue.


As far as I'm aware no one has died from radioactivity at Sizewell......yet there are over a dozen cases of deaths directly related to asbestos. I think these things have to be put into perspective!


----------



## jimenato (Nov 21, 2009)

Blanco53 said:


> As far as I'm aware no one has died from radioactivity at Sizewell......yet there are over a dozen cases of deaths directly related to asbestos. I think these things have to be put into perspective!


Even at Fukushima no one died from radiation..


----------



## 95995 (May 16, 2010)

Blanco53 said:


> As far as I'm aware no one has died from radioactivity at Sizewell......yet there are over a dozen cases of deaths directly related to asbestos. I think these things have to be put into perspective!


Unlike with the asbestos (and, being from Australia, I'm very much aware of the issues with asbestos!), the perspective in terms of radioactive waste and long term; quite aside from cancers and deformities and impacts on the environment a la Chernobyl. I never said that the asbestos was not an issue. You OTOH seem to be saying that the radioactive waste is not an issue - clearly it's not an issue for you personally. I guess it takes all types ...


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

These giant Tesla batteries will resolve the problem of peaks and troughs from the over/under-production of solar energy. Good on you, Elon Musk.

https://www.treehugger.com/energy-policy/tesla-kills-duck-big-batteries.html


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

mrryder99 said:


> On that note, does anyone know if you can get the Tesla batteries here?


I think you should be able to get them very soon:

La batería para autoconsumo Powerwall 2 de Tesla llegará a España este verano: ¡Ya la puedes reservar! | El Periodico de la Energía


----------



## baldilocks (Mar 7, 2010)

In response to the OP's question- Spain isn't resistant to renewable energy, it is the electricity companies who are leaning on the PP because their profits are at risk if people do their own thing. Their pals, the PP, have put restrictions, by way of taxes, on going it alone.


----------



## chrisnation (Mar 2, 2009)

Pesky Wesky said:


> No, the problem as Gus says is political and in fact the turn against renewable energy actually started with the socialists, not the PP


I think this is right. From my reading of it, the PSOE artificially suppressed prices, not allowing the suppliers to raise prices to keep up with rising costs.

When the PP came in, they agreed with the suppliers that prices could rise to 'catch up' with the real cost of supplying electricity. This is why there have been steep rises over a short period.

In addition, it is likely that the suppliers hhave done a deal round the back of the bike shed with PP, to favour them at the expense of renewables.

Sumtin' like dat, anyhow


----------



## risingson2 (Jul 10, 2017)

Hi, lurker here. There is a rumour I love to believe because it makes kind of sense that Spain was actually forced to leave the renewable energy industry as a bargaining chip for not being "rescued" by the EU. It makes more sense when you see the owners of those previous Spanish industries right now.


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

risingson2 said:


> Hi, lurker here. There is a rumour I love to believe because it makes kind of sense that Spain was actually forced to leave the renewable energy industry as a bargaining chip for not being "rescued" by the EU. It makes more sense when you see the owners of those previous Spanish industries right now.


Sorry, I don't understand.  Spain didn't "leave the renewable energy industry", it just made it less profitable for investors, by measures such as removing subsidies and lowering the buy-back rate. Spain's energy companies are still investing in green energy. 

And if your conspiracy theory were true, who was doing the forcing? the EU, the German banks, or the energy companies? 

Anyway, we're back on track now - thanks to the EU.



> Spain sought to lure investment of as much as 3.9 billion euros ($4.3 billion) in its biggest auction yet for contracts to supply electricity from clean-energy sources, part of an effort to meet European Union targets.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...llion-investment-to-meet-eu-clean-energy-goal


----------



## risingson2 (Jul 10, 2017)

Alcalaina said:


> Sorry, I don't understand.  Spain didn't "leave the renewable energy industry", it just made it less profitable for investors, by measures such as removing subsidies and lowering the buy-back rate. Spain's energy companies are still investing in green energy.
> 
> And if your conspiracy theory were true, who was doing the forcing? the EU, the German banks, or the energy companies?
> 
> Anyway, we're back on track now - thanks to the EU.


I need to check the conspiracy theory again, but yeah, it was Germany the one to blame (we love to blame Germans for everything). In this scenario, they lead all the renewable energy industries thanks to Spain putting a lot of obstacles (green energy going from subsidised to penalised), and the Spanish energy companies would just not complain as they were moving slowly. Again, conspiracy theory, pinch of salt.

In any was, let's see how those news develop. I still don't believe that anyone in the EU is interested in Spain leading that market again.


----------

