Cost optimization of the electricity grid

Energy transition fanboys in endless jubilation about how cheap flicker power is. 3 kWh of batteries per kW of PV are required to convert this into 24-hour electricity. Even more expensive 365/24 electricity.

There is the concept of full load hours. If a power line is operated for 4,380 hours per year at 100% load and 4380 hours per year at 50% load, this would be 6,570 full load hours. Photovoltaics in Central Europe have around 1,000 full-load hours per year. If the majority of new power generation plants have so few full-load hours, then it is completely logical that the transportation costs for the electricity increase. These are called grid fees. In 2024, I consumed 2,571 kWh at home. Only €152 of this was the working price of electricity. The rest of the €528 I paid was divided between the handling fee and basic fee from SpottyEnergie.at and the really big hammer grid fees. There will be even higher grid fees in 2025. So I'm paying almost twice as much in grid fees compared to the pure working price of electricity. It's like mail order: you buy goods for €15, go to the checkout, and suddenly you have to pay €30 for shipping. Grid expansion costs are no small matter; they determine the majority of the electricity price. This is again decisive for how quickly the switch to electric cars takes place. The price of 3 kWh of electricity is compared to one liter of diesel. But it could be much worse: at a cement plant like LEUBE, 260 GWh/a of electricity versus 400 GWh/a of thermal energy would be needed to switch from combustion to heating clinker with electricity.

The destructive "whatever the cost" mentality

The energy transition fans feel like the saviors of humanity, who can rule over the stupid rest of humanity at will. It is necessary, we have to do it, whatever the cost. Nothing destroys cost consciousness more than thinking you belong to a world-saving elite. Then there is the difference between flutter current, 24-current and 365/24-current. This is where the fanboys of the energy transition indulge in endless jubilation about how cheap flicker power is. In order to refine flicker power into 24-hour power, 3 kWh of batteries are required per kW of photovoltaics. Further refinement to 365/24 electricity also requires conversion to chemical energy, storage and reconversion to electricity. The effort required for this varies greatly depending on the latitude. But the fanboys of the energy transition are performing their euphoric dance of triumph: "Flatter electricity is cheaper than electricity from gas-fired power plants". All the rest? Refining it to 365/24 and transporting it to the consumer? Unimportant, it will be solved somehow, whatever the cost.

5 hectares as an example

I am currently writing a new novel called "Antrag Basisförderung Forschungsförderungsgesellschaft". I wrote about the potential of cost optimization in grid expansion: 5 hectares of open-field photovoltaic system with 6 MW of photovoltaics, but without storage, requires 6 MW grid connection. 5 hectares of energy-optimized settlement also have 6 MW of photovoltaics, but also 18 MWh of sodium batteries. A 2 MW grid connection is therefore already sufficient. Further optimization is possible with a local power to methanol plant: the 18 MWh of sodium batteries would be supplemented with 1 MW of power to methanol. The required grid connection is reduced to 0.75 MW. One MW of power to methanol produces around 100 liters per hour. We already have a well-developed high-voltage network here. The difference in efficiency between a 500 kW generator and a 500 MW combined cycle power plant is crucial. That's why this methanol is transported to central CCGT power plants using self-propelled electric trucks. For the 5 ha, this would be around 250,000 liters of methanol, 12 trips per year with a large truck. Which option is cheaper? A lot of research institutes should actually be looking into this question.

Example of a possible regulation

Hooray, I have 6 MW of photovoltaics, I only pay the costs up to the grid connection point, the grid operator has to pay the rest according to the EEG. The grid operator is legally obliged to expand the grid accordingly. The costs then end up in exploding grid fees. This should immediately be reduced to, the grid operator bears the expansion costs for a 2 MW grid connection. Correct, not 6 MW but 2 MW. This is sufficient if the 6 MW of photovoltaics are supplemented with 18 MWh of batteries. Assuming that decentralized power to methanol is more cost-efficient than centralized large-scale technology, this could be reduced even further later: between 200 and 400 GW of photovoltaic expansion in Germany, the mandatory grid expansion for the grid operator is reduced from 2 MW to 0.75 MW in this 6 MW peak photovoltaic example. With a linear reduction, the grid operator would then have to install 1.375 MW of grid connection for 300 GW of photovoltaics in the 6 MW peak example.

10,000 km² in Germany 1,000 km² in Austria

These would be the expansion targets for energy-optimized settlement areas mentioned in the Politics and Philosophy brochure. With the above figures, this would be 400 GW in Germany and 40 GW in Austria in terms of electricity connections; this can be significantly corrected downwards to 250 GW, 25 GW. With the decentralized power to variant, it would be 150 or 15 GW.

The planetary restoration mentality

Planetary cleanup back to 350 ppm CO2 means about 47,000 TWh of electricity to filter 1 ppm CO2 from the atmosphere and recycle it into carbon and oxygen. Who can afford that? Only a rich human race, 10 billion people in prosperity can do it. One million km² of energy-optimized settlement areas alone should contribute 150,000 TWh for the necessary electricity for world-wide prosperity and planetary restoration.

GEMINI next Generation AG will prove the contrary

It's not about whether the shares will be worth 100 times or 1000 times more in 20 years' time or whether they will only be worth a few cents. It's about the future of us all. Will there be a big showdown between eco-fascism and yesterday's fossils, or will it be possible to overcome the deep divisions in society and inspire supporters of both sides to work towards a great new goal? Global prosperity and planetary restoration instead of saving, restricting, renouncing and climate catastrophe or peak oil and a little more climate catastrophe. Both sides must be convinced that they have no solution that is even remotely viable. On the one hand, it must be shown that net-zero emissions are a completely inadequate target and that the goal must instead be a planetary clean-up back to 350 ppm CO2. The other side must be shown that solar power enables a higher standard of living than fossil energy. It's about survival! The social situation in 2025 compared to 2005, extrapolated to 2045, makes for a horror world! If we are successful and your shares are worth 100 times more, this is just an addition to all the other achievements. One new shareholder said "Me with my very modest investment", but €400 times €1,000 is also €400,000 for all investments up to the creation of the prototype. There is a reward program for recommending the share to others. Two of the new shareholders have become shareholders through this reward program. Here are the details.

GEMINI shares: time to buy - milestones

The situation has changed fundamentally since this company visited Slovakia. Necessary investment volume reduced by around 90%. Time to marketable product shortened by around one year. The 90% reduction in investment volume also means that each shareholder has significantly more shares. The share price is now lifted towards our targets at each milestone. These milestones can happen in all areas: Financial, new shareholders, new opportunities to attract new shareholders. Contracts to build the prototype, more houses and settlements. Cooperations for realization. Purchase, arrival and testing of important technical components.