Comparative Table of green electricity by Greenpeace

Christophe · by **Christophe** » 02/07/07, 18:10

Thank you to Fréderic_L (see https://www.econologie.com/forums/liberalisa ... 76-20.html ) for telling us about the comparison that Greenpeace has just carried out between French suppliers of so-called "green" electricity.

Only Enercoop product truly green electricity and widely suplante concurrency (4,9 / 20 for EdF : Cheesy:

)

Download Comparative Report:

https://www.econologie.com/liberalisatio ... -3409.html

Electrabel is also very bad note ... that we wanted to sign a green offer in the coming weeks, we will be reviewing the Belgian offer ...

Frederic_L · by **Frederic_L** » 03/07/07, 14:03

You're welcome

!

For those who are interested Enercoop (since they were the best), the doc pdf of the particular offer is particularly well written I find the menu composition of supply and comparisons with conventional subscription EDF regulated tariff and a comparison with the rates charged by European counterparts.

You can consult it HERE (PDF Format)

Pyvesd · by **Pyvesd** » 04/07/07, 00:39

Of course, but what is the "negative" part of nuclear in their rating for a green elec?
Green wants to tell without CO2 own or ...?
to each his priorities ... (another post exists on this subject it seems to me - for those who would argue)

Enercoop:
you can help this sté non-guests.
Indeed, it is partly funded by La Nef, cooperative bank, which one can subscribe for share capital (tax deductible + that is!) Dc promote electric green (but also social, local, the ethics, the environment ... in short q things auquelles ns are sensitive enough

)

Frederic_L · by **Frederic_L** » 04/07/07, 09:16

Pyvesd wrote:Green wants to tell without CO2 own or ...?

I think in the case of EnerCool, green electricity means without CO2 issued for the produced, ie 100% generated from renewable energies (wind power, solar and hydro).

I do not see what one can call "green electricity" which is not produced from renewable energies : roll:

But hey, marketing is very powerful to convey the wool over our eyes! :frown:

Pyvesd · by **Pyvesd** » 04/07/07, 13:01

Frederic_L wrote:I think in the case of EnerCool, green electricity means without CO2 issued for the produced, ie 100% generated from renewable energies (wind power, solar and hydro)

Yes, but not in the case of EDF or Electrabel. Hence the paradox that Gdf is "green" more than EDF despite the difference in the quantity of CO2 emitted ...

Frederic_L · by **Frederic_L** » 04/07/07, 18:15

Pyvesd wrote:Yes, but not in the case of EDF or Electrabel. Hence the paradox that Gdf is "green" more than EDF despite the difference in the quantity of CO2 emitted ...

According to their paper, Greenpeace considers the attitude Global supplier And indeed nuclear energy is penalized, but the gas is too.
Greenpeace may be penalized more severely than the Nuclear Gas ... What finally is can not be a bad idea, radioactive emissions are still more dangerous to health than CO2.

Christophe · by **Christophe** » 04/07/07, 18:49

Good thing the gas to be penalized!

A green electricity from gas * is nothing but an outright scam!

: Evil:

* Except biogas cogeneration recess and possibly ...

Woodcutter · by **Woodcutter** » 04/07/07, 23:42

Frederic_L wrote:[...] I think that in the case of EnerCool, green electricity means without CO2 issued for the produced, ie 100% generated from renewable energies (wind power, solar and hydro). [...]

origin Biomass also for EnerCoop. So that doesn't mean "without CO2", but "without fossil CO2" ...

For your appreciation compared to the danger of radiation and CO2, it is discussed ...

Christophe · by **Christophe** » 04/07/07, 23:51

Woodcutter wrote:For your appreciation compared to the danger of radiation and CO2, it is discussed ...

Well for once I agree with the anti-nuclear ... We cannot honestly classify nuclear (as we currently know it) as green energy (or fluorescent green ...) because "green" should not be limited to CO2 !!

Not to mention the problem of waste, let's not forget that uranium can also be classified as a fossil resource ...

Woodcutter · by **Woodcutter** » 05/07/07, 00:04

Christophe wrote:[...] We cannot honestly classify nuclear (as we know it currently) as green energy (or green fluorescent ...) because "green" should not be limited to CO2 !! [...]

I did not say that ... I just commented the following sentence:

[...] What is ultimately can not be a bad idea, radioactive emissions are still more dangerous to health than CO2.

Join an algorithmic censorship-free community of enthusiasts, technicians, scientists or engineers. Ads removed after registration.

Comparative Table of green electricity by Greenpeace