I would prefer being poor in my own country, Finland. Or alternatively one of the other Nordics. It would be a much better life.

That is irrelevant, as the model of the "pool" doesn't dictate that "your energy is generated by one who you are paying the bill to".

What pool model DOES dictate is that one you pay for electricity supplies the pool with the amount you take out + transmission.

Seriously, you're denying a model that worked in most of the Europe for many years now. You're like a person standing in front of a stone pointing at it and saying "this doesn't exist".

Except that it can't be on the way out, because it's mandated that it needs to be built, because much subsidised renewables cannot function without it being their hot reserve.

Which brings us to the current dilemma. Cheap subsidised renewables are paid with massive subsidies taken from consumers. Electricity from renewables is mandated to always take priority in being taken by exchanges over coal, gas and other non-renewable sources. Yet renewables are useless without equivalent amount of coal and gas (and similar non-renewables) backing them as hot and cold reserve. So non-renewables become unprofitable because much of the time they cannot sell their electricity because renewables get mandated priority. At the same time they cannot shut down, because then renewables wouldn't be able to operate.

And while all this subsidy idiocy is going on, fuelling the entire fiasco, consumers are footing the huge electricity bill that is massively higher than in neighbouring countries simply because of the Energiewende subsidies surcharge.

So the "cheap price" you see on the market is a result of massive corruption of the market by misplaced subsidy regime that makes those who are actually desperately needed unprofitable, and those who are expensive, unprofitable and inoperable without massive backup look actually profitable. Which is the main goal here - to make renewables "appear" profitable on their own. And people like you become the suckers who buy it.

You simply have poor or no understanding of history of democracy then. Look it up. Intimidation of voters was very common in the past, and those aren't some "thought up" methods. Those are the methods that were put to practice with great effect in the past.

For example, you are a daughter in a patriachal family. Your father tells you who to vote, and then takes your card away from you. If you call in your card missing, you face extreme problems inside your own family.

The current system on the other hand allows the daughter to tell her father what he wants to hear, and then vote for whoever she wants to vote for.

I'd rather not get into details about Estonian system. Being a Finn, let's just say that I don't have a very good impression of much of your implementation of state structures, including electronic voting. Considering your past, you did admirably, but you are very far away from where you should be, and electronic voting in the form you implemented is rife with problems such as one mentioned here. Essentially much of it is reactionary to your past, and in that you often go to obsessive extremes which lead you to ruin.

This is a very anglo mentality, that is quite alien to us.

Nope. That's the bullshit claim that is laid to allow uninformed to feel good about it.

In reality, older coal plants have been fired to pick up the slack en masse, and Germany had to even give up on its environmental goals. In fact, after Energiewende started and they had to fire up all the old coal plants, for the first time in over 15 or so years Germany's CO2 emissions increased instead of decreasing. It created quite a furore until it was silenced by organised media push to save Energiewende, because it was clear that if masses found out what was happening for real, they'd be up in arms.

Reality is, when Energiewende started, the lack of energy in Germany became so dire, that they had to fire up essentially all functional mothballed coal plants. The new plants that are coming online are partially taking over hot reserve needs of renewables, and partially replacing these old, formerly mothballed plants. But reality is that these plants were never fired until the policy started. So even if you're very optimistic and assume that current plants are enough to provide hot reserve for increasing renewable production (they are not, but let's pretend), you're still looking at massive increase in coal burning across Germany due to Energiewende.

Wholesale price is down because utilities are FORCED to accept electricity from renewable plants, which were massively built up due to subsidies.

Said subsidies are paid by a massive surcharge taken out of the bill of consumers.

As a result, while electricity wholesale prices are down, the reason they are down is because consumers are being charged an arm and a leg, and that money subsidises production.

And the trend is to increase the surcharge, because Energiewende is at massive risk of failing due to being late or deemed unfeasible on almost every front.

You are likely referring to decision taken under SPD-Greens coalition, which was promptly repealed when CDU came to power.

Next you'll be telling me how we should be grateful to Allies for saving us from Soviet Union?

Hey dickhead, have you tried history?

The grid is a pool. While "location matters" if there is only one source, it is wholly irrelevant if all power companies have clients across the nation, and actual distribution of what how much power is fed and taken is handled by exchanges.

That is how Finnish energy markets have worked for many years now, and that is in part why we enjoy some of the lowest electricity prices in the EU.

We people of Nordics have a long standing tradition of freedom of choice, and compulsory voting would not resonate well with population.

"It's a good thing you voted correctly. Now just leave your electronic ID at work for today and enjoy your nice salary this month".

I live in Finland and pay around 10 eurocents.

We have a sane energy policy though, and rely heavily on nukes and hydro.

http://www.investinfinland.fi/...

Actually the prices are rising because government has made some pretty insane requirements of those companies. They are basically building a completely new power grid in the country which is costing them billions upon billions, on top of building up renewables and coal and gas needed to provide hot reserve for the renewables.

They certainly are posting good profits on all of this, but they're not in a good spot right now with massive investments they have to make and all the subsidy mess that is going on with renewables and grid buildup.

That is an apt summary of Energiewende. It's a "feel good" policy that came after Fukushima, and resulted in a massive build up of coal and gas plants under the guise of "get renewables".

And now you pay so much for electricity, that you actually have energy poverty in Germany - state where there are people who are too poor to afford electricity. In a modern Western country. It's a god damn insanity, but Greens get to feel good about being on the forefront of renewables. Poor be damned, as usual