As Alaska grapples with high diesel costs in remote villages and eyes solar power to diversify its oil-dependent economy, experts are urging caution by pointing to Germany’s energy transition (Energiewende) as a multi-billion-dollar cautionary tale. A 2015 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) report once touted Germany’s solar success as a benchmark for Alaska, highlighting comparable insolation levels to argue for viability despite harsh latitudes. But a decade later, Germany’s transition has ballooned into a multi-trillion-euro burden, raising alarms for cash-strapped Alaska.
While similarities exist—both face low sunlight and fossil fuel reliance—differences underscore the risks. Alaska’s seasonal solar variability, snow losses, and logistical hurdles inflate PV costs 2–4 times U.S. averages, mirroring Germany’s grid bottlenecks and subsidy traps. Germany’s installed capacity has surged to over 112 GW, but at what price? Forecasts now peg total transition costs at up to 5.4 trillion euros by 2049, including 440 billion euros for grid upgrades and 2.8 billion euros in annual “redispatch” payments to idle renewables. High electricity prices—double U.S. rates—have sparked de-industrialization, companies leaving, and public backlash, with household bills doubling and GDP growth lagging 0.5–1% annually.
The DOE’s assumptions amplify the warning: It relied on outdated insolation data (1980s-era), optimistic LCOE estimates (40–129 cents/kWh for solar vs. diesel), federal incentives like 30% tax credits, and low-penetration integration ignoring storage needs or seasonal mismatches. These overlook non-fuel diesel costs, full grid upgrades, and subsidy distortions like Alaska’s Power Cost Equalization program, which could erode incentives. Germany’s experience shows how such assumptions underestimated locked-in subsidies (16 billion euros in 2024 alone) and economic drags, leading to “buyer’s remorse.”
For Alaska, whose $50 billion GDP hinges on oil, mimicking this could hike utility rates roughly 20–50% short-term to include infrastructure costs for integration and exacerbate budget strains amid low oil prices. “With the current policy, the energy transition cannot succeed. It risks driving energy-intensive industries abroad while weakening Germany’s economic base,” warned DIHK President Peter Adrian.
Renewable advocates say Alaska’s vast potential remains untapped at just 33 MW installed, but without reevaluating assumptions, the transition could mirror Germany’s pitfalls rather than its promises. The irony of the German energy transition is that instead of reversing course to reliable and affordable power sources, policy makers are doubling down on research for ways to reduce the cost of the transition to mitigate their contribution to global climate change. In the end, the citizens are sacrificed to the quest for climate neutrality.
The comparisons shown here are not good and out of touch with reality. Renewables are not the answer by any means and especially using a country like Germany to compare anything in Alaska or the USA. Today, we can and will push more oil through our pipeline to Valdez. We can and should work with the oil companies and their partners to bring the gas pipeline right into Valdez for much less building expense and maintenance to shipping in National Security area out of Valdez. Renewables have been the bane of Alaska energy sources and proven over time to be worthless to our energy needs.
What we need is enough gas to heat homes by 2027. Are we going to truck it from the North Slope or put it on a train or both? Because the new pipeline won’t be done in time. Or do we think Hilcorp and Fury will be able to supply the demand by themselves?
Let’s compare how one powers a snow machine in a remote village. Will the villagers be plugging in their electric skidoo and waiting 3 hours to recharge it or will they be using good old-fashioned fuel that’s not fossil (that old lie we were duped with) to gas ‘n go? Nuff said.
Solar energy in a place that has little to no sunshine when it needs it the most is a foolish investment, but there are plenty of fools who will demand the poor investment.
Green energy is a myth, the cost of construction, materials and then waste is never recovered. Technology has created small nuclear reactors that would serve the purpose. It needs to be discussed.
I would lump the small nuclear reactors in the “Green Energy” camp. That Team Green never discusses them leads me to question both the acuity and motivation of its loudest cheerleaders.
Please tell me you are running again for CEA next year. I hereby commit to assist.
When the EPA came up with the Ultra Low sulphur diesel mandate it cost the nation trillions of dollars and totally destroyed the ability of the refineries in the state to supply low cost diesel fuel for generated power in Alaska. Climate change and the green agenda is the biggest scam ever foisted on modern society.
The experience in Germany – and I have spent months in Germany in recent years – demonstrates how destructive it is to embrace flawed environmental notions. Renewable sources like wind and solar fun to set up and the control systems are intricate. The Germans are really good at the latter. In Germany, government has seriously impaired the base load capacity. A big problem is that the wind resource is in the north but much of the demand is in the south. Transmission capacity is inadequate and sometimes the wind does not blow. The cost of energy has tripled (or more) in the last decade. This cost increase has hurt industry.
All of this has happened in order to “decarbonize”. The benefits – if any – of “decarbonization” are somewhere between vague and mythical. Climate change is occurring at a rate well below predictions. The extent of human causation of climate change remains debatable. This much is known: Even if the carbon emissions of Europe and the US are cut in half, they will not make much of an impact compared to China and other developing nations.
Embracing “decarbonization” for speculative or vague benefits is an error. Unfortunately, the Chugach Electric Board is totally under the spell of “decarbonization.”. Alaskans will pay for this error, just as Germans are now doing so.
Energy transition studies just like the gazillion predator control studies amount the same thing. Jack sh#t….Woke/indoctrinated biologist and the self proclaimed scientist amount to nothing more than solutions looking for a problem.
All said and done, it’s only people that they want to, and apparently are capable of mismanaging. Can’t let common sense get in the way of a mountain of student loans.
As a German I can tell you, that this article is gaslighting and misleading in many ways. Starting wit the sunlight comparison, which is wrong. Problems in the transition are because of bad government decisions and regulations. I.e. “Föderalismus”.Fossil fuel will drive humanity into extinction I we are unable to stop our stupid behavior
Climate change and “clean” energy are done – a myth exposed by BigTech.
Bill Gates, who earned billions and billions on the face of climate change just came out and stated, emphatically that it is BOGUS.
All the BigTech guys are suckin’ up to Trump now.
Why?
AI centers will require our electrical grid to be expanded 300% to 400% – that WILL NOT occur with so olar, wind, and fairy dust.
It will only occur with a combination of nuclear, coal, oil, and gas.
Wake up LibTards, please!…
GVEA in Fairbanks has a small solar farm. They are trying to lease the panels, or the panels output to the members. I believe they are having trouble determining a lease price.
I’ve seen the giant wind mills in Nome. You know…the ones that never turn. What a waste of money they are, in addition to being bird slayers and an eyesore.
One of the main reasons for Germany’s recent soaring energy costs is the fact that they lost their main source of cheap Russian natural gas – which made their industrial base highly competitive – when the Nordstream Pipeline was sabotaged and they were forced to buy expensive LNG from the United States. A cautionary example of putting all our eggs in the LNG basket. Do we really want to bet on potential LNG markets based on Gunboat Diplomacy?
Germany’s debt is 62.9% of GDP, USA debt is 122% of GDP. Long term investments in renewable resources makes more sense than continuing to subsidize hydrocarbon extraction.