Chinese shale gas targets are dud..

[admin]

Agree but NG/LNG is the bridge fuel at least through 2030 IMHO. Solar has the clear advantage over wind and until some "clean" way to produce and eventually dispose of spent batteries for storage is devised, nations would be wise not to follow Germany's lead. Classic example of an overreaction to a perceived problem. Until the issues are resolved solar etc should not become the base generation source. Germany is risking loss of industry which cannot be subject to fluctuating base generation and possible brownouts due to lack of wind or cloudy days. And asking fossil fueled generation facilities to be ready turn flip switches on and off AND operate at losses while you experiment with new base generation methods is irresponsible. Slow is the way to go with this; unless government's ultimate plan is to own all base generation sources and can "afford" to absorb these losses.

Well, perhaps, but there is another way to look at that (apart from the new jobs and export potential the new technologies might generate), and that is that Germany has created significant positive externalities for the rest of the world exactly because they have been bold. A few points:

• By creating a large scale solar market they've enabled the industry to reap economies of scale and learning and increasing the market, which enables specialization and innovation (look up Adam Smith and pin factory if unsure). This lowered the cost for the rest of the world
• By being bold in their energy approach (an experiment on a national scale), the world can learn from them, copy what works and avoid the mistakes.