网帖翻译

ad727272
For fuck sake why are we so high? Please don't say Brexit.

我们特么的怎么会这么高？别跟我说是英国脱欧。

Snarwib
Australia
You guys were never on the continental European grid, and there are non-EU countries on that grid, so yeah nothing to do with Brexit. It's just gas-fired generation being real expensive because of the war.

你们从未在大陆欧洲电网中，而且该电网包含非欧盟国家，所以和英国脱欧没关系。只是单纯由于战争导致天然气发电成本高昂而已。

LogicalReasoning1
United Kingdom
Like EU our prices are lixed to gas but tories sold off most of our storage so we can’t store some when prices are cheap in summer and get extra fucked when prices increase

就像欧盟一样，我们的价格与天然气挂钩，但是保守党出售了大部分的存储能力，所以我们无法在夏季价格便宜时储存一些，而在价格上涨时受到更大的困扰。

SquintyBrock
No, literally nothing to do with Brexit.
The graph is a little misleading, because it’s actually a lot more complicated than can be illustrated on the graph.
The biggest factor is the UK dependence on imported gas, that why you see a huge price spike from the Ukraine war.
There are other things like the fact that green subsidies are paid for directly out of energy tariffs, which is not the case across the eu.
Another huge factor is the level of privatisation in the energy industry in the uk (under thatcher), which has demonstrably caused higher energy prices. What is particularly “hilarious” about this is that profits to companies like EDF helps subsidise energy provision in EU countries. Ha ha ha… not.
So no, this has absolutely nothing to with Brexit.

不，这与英国脱欧毫无关系。
这张图有点误导，因为它实际上比图上所显示的要复杂得多。
最大的因素是英国对进口天然气的依赖，这也是乌克兰战争导致价格大幅飙升的原因。
还有其他一些因素，比如绿色补贴直接从能源关税中支付，而欧盟各国并非如此。
另一个巨大的因素是英国能源行业的私有化（撒切尔时期），这确实导致了更高的能源价格。特别是令人“好笑”的是，像 EDF 这样的公司获得的利润有助于补贴欧盟国家的能源供应。哈哈……完全不好笑
所以，这与英国脱欧完全无关。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

CaptchaSolvingRobot
Because we chose a price model where the most expensive production in the mix sets the price.
So we are always paying the max price - in order to 'encourage the development of efficient production' - cause profit margins will be reinvested and no-one will abuse a system like that - like say .. trading energy back and forwards to bring the price up.

因为我们选择了一种价格模式，即由组合中最昂贵的产品来确定价格。
因此，我们总是在支付最高价格--以“鼓励发展高效生产”--因为利润空间将被重新投资，没有人会滥用这样的系统--比如说......通过能源的来回交易来抬高价格。

Vindve
France
So we are always paying the max price
No. The average price is lower than the "instant (spot) market" price. Most of energy is purchased in advance. Then there are last minute purchases to adapt offer and demand, but it doesn't represent the bulk of purchases.
Because we chose a price model where the most expensive production in the mix sets the price.
Neither. It's the last power added that sets up the price. Basically, it's like, demand: "Oh I was wrong in my purchases, finally I need 1Mwh more. Let see what is the cheapest currently on the spot market". Offer: "well, most of electricity has already been sold and the cheapest first, you're buying the 1% not sold, and yes, it's pretty expensive as the only thing available is gas imported from the USA, but hey, it's last minute, and it represents costs".
There is nothing wrong with this mechanism, it's called marginal costs.

“所以我们总是支付最高价格。”
不，平均价格低于所谓的“实时（现货）市场”价格。大部分能源都是提前购买的。虽然也有为适应供求关系而在最后一刻购买的情况，但这并不代表大部分的购买量。
“因为我们选择的价格模式是由组合中最昂贵的产品来确定价格。”
也不是，是最后添加的电力决定的价格。基本上就像，需求：“哦，我买错了，最后我发现还需要 100 万千瓦时。让我们看看目前现货市场上最便宜的是什么”。供应：“嗯大部分的电已经卖出去了，并且是最便宜的部分，你现在在买剩下的1%，并且没错，它很贵因为唯一可用的是美国进口的天然气，但是嘿，这是最后时刻的，而且代表着成本”。
这种机制并没有错，这就是所谓的边际成本。

Miserable_Ad7246
>Because we chose a price model where the most expensive production in the mix sets the price
That is false. USA also uses such an auction approach. Not in every state, but they also do that.
We have this because of two factors:
Europe has this feeling of greatness. We do nothing to maintain our edge in the world, because we are "Europe", hence we do all kinds of silly thing all the time and are slowly reaping the consequences.
The green way of thinking (based on wishful thinking) - lest close all dirty production and things will auto-resolve. While at it also lets close nuclear. Where is no proper strategy in place, some virtuous people say this is the right thing to do, and when shit hits the fan. Focus had to be set on cleaner production, before closing things. But no lets do everything the wrong way.
Europe lacks its own energy resources. Green people are partially to blame as well here. Because they pushed for extraction cuts, rather than pushed for better local production.
In general, it's a clusterfuck made because people think that stuff just works and auto-resolves. Let's see how it will work out once even more factories close, and people vote in even more radical/populist people into power.
Before you go and comment that I'm an asshole - I have a solar power plant (10kw), heat pump, and super well-insulated and airtight house (you would not believe how little energy I use for heating).I did more to greenify my footprint than 90% of the population. And yet I also think green activists are mostly entitled idiots who care only about themselves and to cover that use virtuous signaling to feel better.

“因为我们选择的价格模式是由组合中最昂贵的产品来确定价格。”
这是错误的。美国也使用这种拍卖方式。不是在每个州都这么做，但他们也会这样做。
我们来到这种境地是因为两个因素：
1. 欧洲有一种优越感。因为我们是“欧洲”，所以我们不需要做任何事情来保持我们在世界上的优势，因此我们一直在做各种傻事，并慢慢地收获了后果。
2. 绿色思维（基于一厢情愿的想法）--最好关闭所有脏的生产，事情就会自动解决。关闭核能就是这种想法的体现，在没有制定好策略的情况下就贸然关闭事物。一些善良的人说这是正确的做法，但在问题爆发时就无计可施了。在关闭核电厂之前，必须将重点放在清洁生产上。但是，让我们用错误的方式来做所有事情吧。
欧洲缺乏自己的能源资源。部分绿色人士也要对此负责。因为他们推动了开采削减，而非推动更好地在本地生产。
总的来说，这是一团糟，因为人们认为事情会自动解决和修复。让我们拭目以待，一旦更多工厂倒闭，人们投票选举更多激进/民粹主义者上台执政，结果会如何。
在你说我是个混蛋之前-- 我有一个太阳能发电厂（10 千瓦）、热泵和超级隔热密闭的房子（你不会相信我的取暖能耗有多低）。我在绿色化自己的足迹方面所做的比90%的人还要多。然而我还是认为绿党活动家大多是自以为是的白痴，只关心自己，为了让自己感觉更好而滥用道德信号。

TheJiral
Differences within the EU are quite large. For Portugal for example non-household medium size customer prices haven't increased much. In Austria the have doubled.
And for the Putinfans, Hungary is even worse off than Austria. So capitulating towards Russia doesn't give you cheap electricity. I know, the FPÖ is also spreading that fairy tale, like it does with all fairy tales from Sputnik.

欧盟内部的差异相当大。以葡萄牙为例，非家庭中等规模客户的价格没有增加多少。而在奥地利，价格却翻了一番。
对普京粉丝说一下，匈牙利的情况甚至比奥地利还要糟糕。因此向俄罗斯投降并不能给你便宜的电力。我知道，奥地利自由党（极右翼）也在传播这个童话故事，就像它传播所有来自俄罗斯卫星通讯社的故事一样。

dcmso
Portugal | Switzerland
Yeah the Iberian Peninsula is an “energy island”, being almost its completely separate thing of rest of the EU when it comes to Energy. Always has been. Not only because of France, but also because of their proximity to other markets (Us and Africa)
This is both good and bad, but when energy prices skyrocketed throughout EU because of the war in Ukraine, Spain and Portugal didn’t see such massive increases because most energy actually comes either from renewables (winds, dams and mostly solar) but also from Africa or the US (gas and fuel).
Prices did increase here, but not as much as other EU countries thats for sure.

是的，伊比利亚半岛是一个“能源岛”，在能源方面几乎完全独立于欧盟其他地区。一直以来都是如此。不仅因为法国，还因为他们靠近其他市场（美国和非洲）。
这既是好事也是坏事，但当乌克兰战争导致整个欧盟的能源价格暴涨时，西班牙和葡萄牙并没有出现如此大规模的涨价，因为大部分能源实际上都来自可再生能源（风能、水坝和大部分太阳能），但也有来自非洲或美国（天然气和燃料）的能源。
这里的价格确实上涨了，但肯定没有其他欧盟国家涨得多。

Wooden-Ad-3382
lifting sanctions on russia would in fact give you cheaper natural gas again, that is the entire reason this problem exists

解除对俄罗斯的制裁实际上会再次给你更便宜的天然气，这就是这个问题存在的原因

mutedexpectations
I hope you don't think Russian took the Crimea because they wanted to liberate Russians. It has nothing to do with Nato too.

我希望你不要认为俄罗斯占领克里米亚是因为他们想解放俄罗斯人。这也与北约无关。

Nicita27
Don't tell me it was because of the massiv gas reserves that were found in the waters around crimea? What a twist.

难道是因为在克里米亚周围的水域发现了巨大的天然气储备吗？这真是意外啊
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

Cicada-4A
Norge
Can you stop saying Europe like Norway, Switzerland, Russia(for better and worse), Belarus, Iceland, the UK, Ukraine and most of the Balkans doesn't exist?
It's so fucking annoying. I'm not here to shit on the unx or anything but lets not conflate a political unx with the entire continent.

你们可以停止说欧洲，却假装挪威、瑞士、俄罗斯（不管好还是坏）、白俄罗斯、冰岛、英国、乌克兰和巴尔干半岛的大部分国家不存在吗？
这真的很烦人。我不是在这里要诋毁欧盟或任何其他东西，但请不要将政治联合体等同于整个大陆。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

Distinct-Entity_2231
Hopefuly soon Hamburg
Nuclear, I'm keep saying it, nuclear!
If we had proper grid of nuclear plants, this would not have happened.
So thank you, Deutschland. This one is thanks to you and your absolutely retarded anti-nuclear ideology. Brainwashing by weapons-grade stupidity.

核能！我一直在说，核能！
如果我们有适当的核电站电网，这种事情就不会发生。
所以，谢谢你，德国。这要感谢你和你那绝对弱智的反核意识形态。用武器级的愚蠢来洗脑。

Neutronium57
France
Germany is the most influencial among European countries that are against nuclear power, but it's not the worst.
Austria is even more stupid because they passed a law decades ago that states Austria is a "nuclear free" country, and the sole power plant under construction never entered service despite being practically finished.

在反对核电的欧洲国家中，德国的影响力最大，但它并不是最糟糕的。
奥地利更加愚蠢，因为他们几十年前就通过了一项法律，规定奥地利是一个“无核”国家，而唯一在建的发电厂尽管几乎已经完工，却从未投入使用。

IndubitablyNerdy
Italy dismantled its own working nuclear plants after a referndum that was made not long after Cernobyl... We were probably the only country that let a popular vote after a nuclear catastrophe in the soviet unx decide our energy future and we are still paying for our old plants today by the way due to storage. We also stopped construction of a reactor that was in progress and had costed us billions already.
When we tried to reintroduce nuclear we made another referendum, shortly after Fukushima...
I guess we are probably on top of the chart on this, as with many negative charts in Europe...

在切尔诺贝利核电站事故后不久，意大利就在一次全民公决后拆除了自己的核电站...... 我们可能是唯一一个在苏联发生核灾难后让民众投票决定我们能源未来的国家，而且由于储存问题，我们至今仍在为我们的旧核电站买单。我们还停止了一个正在建设中的反应堆的建设，虽然该反应堆已经花费了我们数十亿美元。
当我们试图重新引入核电时，我们又进行了一次全民公决，就在福岛事故发生后不久......
我想我们在这方面可能是名列前茅的，就像在欧洲的许多负面排行榜上一样...
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

Early-Accident-8770
Same here in Ireland. Two small plants would be enough for small Population but instead thanks to greens we destroy fishing and mountains to build short term wind turbines. And cover good land with solar plants. It’s really a stupid stance but….greens are an ideology not rationalists

爱尔兰也是如此。两座小型发电厂就足以满足小规模人口的需求，但由于绿党的存在，我们却毁掉了渔场和山脉来建造短期风力涡轮机。用太阳能发电厂覆盖良田。这真是一种愚蠢的立场，但....绿党是一种意识形态，而不是理性主义者。

lucashtpc
Meanwhile Germany Would Need around 45 new plants to run the grid by nuclear. Is that your solution? Really?
Meanwhile when we have those 45 plants in 25 years, we still need coal plants, gas plants, batteries or our neighbors to level our consumption and our production. Nuclear always runs at the same rate 24/7 no matter if we need energy or not. You can turn them down but that makes the cost calculation explode and the lifecycle calculation dip…
And all that while being more expensive than the renewable technologies that lower their cost per watt every single year.

同时，德国将需要大约45座新的核电站来运行电网。这是你的解决方案吗？真的吗？
同时，在我们拥有这45座电站25年后，我们仍然需要煤炭发电厂、燃气发电厂、电池或我们的邻居们来调节我们的消费和生产。核电站始终以相同的速度全天候运行，无论是否需要能源。你可以降低它们的功率，但这会使成本计算爆炸，并且生命周期计算下降……
而所有这些都比每年都在降低每瓦成本的可再生技术更加昂贵。

democritusparadise
Ireland
This is almost certainly the primary reason the US economy has doubled relative to the EUs since 2004.

这几乎可以肯定是自 2004 年以来美国经济相对于欧盟翻了一番的主要原因。

NotYetFlesh
The primary reason is that the US dollar has appreciated relative to the Euro so the nominal value of Europe's economy went down when measured in American dollars. Things look a bit better in real terms.
The second reason is that the USA beat Europe in the tech boom by a mile. While EU countries have adapted to it they have not been anywhere close to leaders in the field.
Energy costs come third or fourth depending on what you think about deficit spending. Because one big reason why the US economy growing faster is that the US has been deficit spending a lot, especially in recent years. The debt burden of all EU countries is about 80% of European GDP. US Federal debt is worth 120% of US GDP.

主要原因是美元相对于欧元升值，因此以美元计算，欧洲经济的名义价值下降了。按实际价值计算，情况要好一些。
第二个原因是，美国在科技繁荣方面远远领先于欧洲。虽然欧盟国家已经适应了这一趋势，但在该领域并未成为领导者。
能源成本排在第三或第四位，这取决于你对赤字支出的看法。因为美国经济增长较快的一个重要原因是美国的赤字支出较多，尤其是近年来。所有欧盟国家的债务负担约为欧洲 GDP 的 80%。而美国联邦债务占美国国内生产总值的 120%。

invicerato
Finland
Third reason is that the USA has been buying out successful EU companies or incentivitizing them to move to America with low taxes.

第三个原因是，美国一直在收购成功的欧盟公司，或以低税率激励它们迁往美国。

IndubitablyNerdy
I agree with what you said. In general the USA has a lot of competitive advantages compared to EU. They also have a continent that is pretty much in their sphere of influence and even when they go to war it is far away from their borders. The Ukraine war affected EU much more than the US since we did trade much more with both Russia and Ukraine, in fact, US producers probably love us being dependent on energy import from them.
The dollar being the reserve currency of the world is also another advantage, it allows them to print money much more freely than the EU. In fact the ECB needs to follow the Fed more often than not since our energy imports are denominated in dollars, which reduces our monetary authonomy compared to them.
The tech advantage is also tied to the fact that they have a single financial market and their technology business can rely on financing from a nation whose economy is greater than that of each european state combined. Plus it was a race and they won first place, now many of their giants are de-facto monopolies and it's hard to create a local equivalent without massive investments. Admittedly many of our countries aslo protected local auto-makers a bit too aggressively which caused a focus on the industry that much likely should have been reduced decades ago.

我同意你的观点。总的来说，与欧盟相比，美国有很多竞争优势。他们还拥有一个几乎在其势力范围内的大陆，即使发生战争也远离其边界。乌克兰战争对欧盟的影响要比对美国的影响大得多，因为我们与俄罗斯和乌克兰的贸易量都要大得多，事实上，美国的生产商可能更喜欢我们依赖从他们那里进口能源。
美元作为世界储备货币也是另一个优势，这使他们可以比欧盟更自由地印制钞票。事实上，由于我们的能源进口是以美元计价的，欧洲央行需要更多地跟在美联储后面，这就降低了我们的货币自主权。
技术优势还与他们拥有单一的金融市场有关，他们的技术业务可以依靠一个经济总量超过欧洲各国总和的国家的融资。再加上这是一场竞赛，他们赢得了第一名，现在他们的许多巨头已经成为事实上的垄断者，如果不进行大量投资，很难在当地建立起与之相当的企业。不可否认的是，我们许多国家对本地汽车制造商的保护有些过于激进，这导致了对该行业的关注，而这种关注很可能在几十年前就应该减少了。

Grabs_Diaz
No, based on what exactly do you draw your conclusion?
Energy prices have probably played a role over the past few years with the recent cost explosion. But the graph clearly shows that prices have been pretty stable until the end of 2021 on both sides of the Atlantic, while the United States always had access to cheaper energy. That's nothing new. Plus it's generally not energy-intensive industries that made up most of US growth.

不，你究竟是根据什么得出结论的？
在过去几年里，能源价格可能起到了一定的作用，最近成本激增。但从图表中可以清楚地看出，直到 2021 年底，大西洋两岸的能源价格都相当稳定，而美国一直都能获得更便宜的能源。这并不新鲜。另外，美国经济增长的主要部分一般都不是能源密集型产业。

democritusparadise
Ireland
The graph only goes back to 2015, but it was pre-2008 that our economies were broadly the same.
Also, this is a graph of energy prices, not wealth; all else being equal, one would absolutely expect the economies to diverge if the energy prices were stable but different, and even until 2021 our costs were well over 50% higher.
Also, energy cost affects 100% of the domestic economy, not just energy intensive sectors? If our costs are 50% higher, we pay 50% for for switching on a 5W lightbulb (again all else being equal, so yes that is simplified). It means that our domestic goods and services become more expensive than imports from places that have lower energy costs, having a knock-on effect as more people buy cheaper (yet more environmentally destructive, due to shipping) imports.
High energy costs are a grave threat to our prosperity. ...just ask Germans, now that they haven't got cheap Russian imports.

该图表仅追溯到2015年，但在2008年之前，我们的经济基本相同。
此外，这是一张能源价格的图表，而不是财富的图表；在其他条件相同的情况下，如果能源价格稳定但不同，经济绝对会出现分歧，甚至到2021年，我们的成本仍然高出50%以上。此外，能源成本影响的是100%的国内经济，而不仅仅是能源密集型行业。如果我们的成本高出50%，那么我们在开启一个5瓦特的灯泡时也要多支付50%（再次强调，其他条件相同，所以这是简化的）。这意味着我们的国内商品和服务比来自能源成本较低地区的进口商品更贵，导致更多人购买更便宜的（但由于运输而对环境更具破坏性的）进口商品。高能源成本对我们的繁荣构成了严重威胁……问问德国人就知道了，现在他们没有廉价的俄罗斯进口了。