Andreas Tirez

41.6K posts

Andreas Tirez

Andreas Tirez

@andreastirez

Opinions are cheap, facts are expensive

Belgium Katılım Mayıs 2010
665 Takip Edilen5.7K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Andreas Tirez
Andreas Tirez@andreastirez·
Zon en wind is goedkoper dan kerncentrales openhouden, zegt @KoenSchoors - wind onshore beperkt door vergunningen - zon levert "niets" in winter - wind offshore 2-3x duurder dan kerncentrales openhouden Hier mijn cijfers: linkedin.com/posts/andreas-… Waar jouw cijfers, professor?
De Afspraak@deafspraaktv

Vanavond in #deafspraakopvrijdag: @MDiependaele, @cauwelaert en @KoenSchoors over de industrie in Vlaanderen en het functioneren van de Vlaamse regering. Om 20u35 op VRT Canvas.

Nederlands
35
83
436
28.4K
Andreas Tirez retweetledi
Ryan Briggs
Ryan Briggs@ryancbriggs·
I've possibly never experienced more consumer surplus than the ~20/month LLM plans
English
21
35
387
32.6K
Andreas Tirez
Andreas Tirez@andreastirez·
@AukeHoekstra @JakobSchieder I totally agree that batteries can be a blessing to get system costs down (peak shaving, congestion management and grid stability), but giving a different locational price than the zonal price can provoke gaming (see inc-dec game).
English
0
0
1
23
AukeHoekstra
AukeHoekstra@AukeHoekstra·
The energy producers don't get a different price. But there's a congestion price signal added by the grid operator for the few moments and places when there actually is a problem. You can also do it differently. E.g. by contracts that give the operator the day ahead option to ask you to change behavior on a certain location an a certain time. It's all new but demand-response is unavoidable if you want to use solar and wind well, want to make the grid resilient, and if you don't want to spend billions a year on overbuilding the grid.
English
1
0
1
41
AukeHoekstra
AukeHoekstra@AukeHoekstra·
Instead of using batteries to avoid peaks, German TSOs propose to disable them, thus increasing costs for consumers and hindering wind and solar. All because they don't want to change their outdated ways. Wrong on so many levels.
Ed Porter@edcporter

Germany's TSOs propose a schedule freeze for batteries, blocking trading changes hours before delivery. Modo Energy models a 92% intraday revenue hit if batteries lose all continuous intraday access.

English
20
104
492
27K
AukeHoekstra
AukeHoekstra@AukeHoekstra·
@JakobSchieder Does political opposition mean the TSO cannot propose it? (Also: you can give a congestion signal separate from an energy supply signal.)
English
2
0
4
341
Kevin Spiritus
Kevin Spiritus@KevinSpiritus·
Wat de inhoud betreft: de uitgaven in België zijn hoog. De grootste posten zijn onderwijs, pensioenen en gezondheidszorg. Vooral pensioenen en gezondheidszorg groeien snel. Maar daar snel veel op besparen is moeilijk: er zijn beloftes gemaakt, en hervormingen vragen tijd. 10/
Nederlands
2
0
0
37
Benjamin Wolf 🇺🇦
A thread responding to @luisgaricano’s post on US vs. Europe. Some valid points on tech and equity. But several key claims on living standards in particular don’t hold up or are at the very least cherry-picked. 🧵
Luis Garicano 🇪🇺🇺🇦@lugaricano

We stopped everything to write an answer (link below) to Paul Krugman's two posts of today (one informal, one with a simple model) arguing that Europe is broadly not falling behind the United States. The change measured by the Draghi report, he argues, is mostly due to growth in the technology industry, which has distorted GDP numbers without actually leading to higher standards of living. We should believe our eyes when we walk around France and walk around Mississippi. Krugman is wrong. The measures he uses understate European stagnation. This matters enormously. Divergence with the United States is the strongest evidence for reform in Europe. 1. The growth numbers Krugman compares the United States, France, and Germany at purchasing power parity in current prices. On that measure, France's and Germany's position relative to America has been roughly constant since 2000. But current price comparisons miss productivity gains in sectors where prices fall. If America produces twice as much software while the price of each unit halves, the value of American software output looks unchanged even though the volume has doubled. Most economists therefore use constant prices, which fix the base-year PPP level and apply each country's real output growth on top of it. American output growth has concentrated in tech, where prices have fallen tremendously as productivity rises. In terms of the volume of things produced, America has pulled away from Europe. 2. Is it all the tech industry? Krugman concedes this tech divergence but says it is not welfare-relevant. The American growth lead is an accounting artefact of measuring more iPhones at base-year prices, not a sign that Americans are actually richer, because Europeans buy the same iPhones at the same world prices. This is not the right way to think about the world today, as an earlier Paul Krugman would have argued. His model assumes tradable goods, interchangeable workers, marginal-cost pricing, and no profits. Each assumption fails. Most of what households buy is non-tradable: housing, healthcare, childcare, education. When American tech firms bid workers from haircutting to coding, American haircut wages rise. Germany has no growing tech sector to do the bidding, so German wages stay flat. Technology is not priced at marginal cost. Apple's margins are around 40 percent. Anthropic's inference margins are at 70 percent. The major platforms enjoy network effects, switching costs, and lock-in that hold prices well above what a competitive market would deliver. A large share of the productivity gains in technology stays as profit. A lot of the value of American technology dominance shows up in equity, not in wages. Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, Alphabet, Meta, and Amazon together are worth $21 trillion, more than the entire combined stock market value of all European stock markets. Around 60 percent of US equity is held by American households. The median French or Spanish household holds almost no equity. The median employee at Meta, a company with almost 80,000 employees, earned $388,000 in 2025. This advantage is not going to go away. Krugman's own 1991 paper, cited in his Nobel prize, showed that comparative advantage in modern industries is produced by increasing returns to scale, specialized labor markets, supplier networks and the agglomeration of suppliers, workers, and ideas in particular places. Once an industry concentrates somewhere, the concentration is self-reinforcing. Europe is being pushed away from the next round of technology industries (AI!). 3. What about inequality? Another retort is that GDP per capita hides substantial inequality, and so even if America is rich on average, this is mostly due to the super wealthy. But despite the US's high pre-tax income inequality, it also achieves higher median incomes than Europe, in part because of such a high base, and in part because it actually redistributes more than many European countries. The cleanest comparison is median equivalised disposable household income: income after cash taxes and transfers, adjusted for household size and purchasing power. According to the OECD's 2021 numbers, the median American earns 30 percent more than the median Dutchman, about 31 percent more than the median German, and about 52 percent more than the median Frenchman. 4. What about hours worked? Krugman points out that while American GDP per person is higher, most of this is because Americans work more. For this divergence to be an hours worked story, Americans must work more relative to Europeans now than they did in 2000. The opposite has happened. Birinci, Karabarbounis, and See in a 2026 NBER paper show that about half of the American-European hours gap that existed in the 1990s has reversed by the end of the 2010s. Americans work fewer hours per person than they did in 2000, while most Europeans work more. 5. Is America not a bad place to live? Walk around Alabama and France: surely the former cannot be substantially richer than the latter? American cities often have poorer centres and richer suburbs or exurbs. European cities preserve richer and more attractive historic cores. A visit to a city as a tourist in America compared with a city in France will leave one having seen different spots on the income distribution. Americans in Europe go to the nicest and richest European cities. Rather than a walking around test, do a driving around test. Go to the periphery of any modern American city and see a level of new-built material wealth that is extremely uncommon in Europe, with thousands of enormous four- or five-bedroom homes. In the South, in places like Nashville and Austin, drive around the downtowns to see hundreds of luxury apartment buildings springing from the ground. This construction boom is replicated virtually nowhere in Europe today. The other question is generational. Housing often costs more in Europe than in the United States, despite the quality of the housing stock generally being much better. Europe has nice city cores but these are inaccessible to young Europeans. Consider the salaries available to entry-level workers. The starting pay for a London police officer is $57,000. In Washington, DC, $75,000. The entry-level Deloitte consultant job in Madrid pays around €28,000, roughly $33,000 per year. In Charlotte, the entry-level Deloitte job pays $63,000. There are many things to dislike about life in America. But relative to 25 years ago, the gap in material wealth has shifted dramatically in America's favor. siliconcontinent.com/p/european-sta…

English
7
21
104
17.6K
Benjamin Wolf 🇺🇦
13/ Most concerning is of course sovereignty. Even if living standards and productivity per hour worked are broadly the same, it's still indisputable that big tech is very powerful - and clearly American. That's a huge European dependency and problem.
English
1
1
8
226
Andreas Tirez retweetledi
Benjamin Wolf 🇺🇦
6/ On hours worked: Americans work 1,800 hrs/year vs 1,340 in Germany, a gap of 11 full working weeks. Where the gap has narrowed since 2000, the NBER paper he cites explains why: Medicaid expansion meant Americans no longer needed to hold a job just to get health coverage.
English
1
1
17
1.5K
Kevin Spiritus
Kevin Spiritus@KevinSpiritus·
Dit is een van de elementen waar we qua professionalisering van de openbare financiën in België naartoe moeten: een publiek beschikbaar Ombuigingslijst met mogelijke besparingen.
Kevin Spiritus tweet media
Nederlands
2
1
8
798
Andreas Tirez retweetledi
Abi Olvera
Abi Olvera@Abi0lvera·
Imagine if we had blocked farm automation to protect agriculture jobs.
Abi Olvera tweet media
English
46
363
2.3K
114.4K
Siem De Cleyn
Siem De Cleyn@SiemDeCleyn·
@JurgenGeevels @Stoonbrace Minder afhankelijkheid van de gas-sjeiks en -presidenten, minder CO2 in de lucht pompen en goedkopere stroom om de energietransitie te versnellen. Als er iemand daarvoor zou moeten juichen is het de redactie van De Standaard?
Nederlands
3
0
10
250
Joannes Laveyne
Joannes Laveyne@Laveyne_J·
@andreastirez Zowat alle state-of-the-art UCED modellen bevatten tegenwoordig bovendien een FBMC approximatie. Modellen zijn idd niet de werkelijkheid, maar voor een investeringsbeslissing toch wel de aangewezen tool.
Nederlands
2
0
0
109
Joannes Laveyne
Joannes Laveyne@Laveyne_J·
Berekening door Aurora Research: openhouden van meerdere kernreactoren leidt tot 1,9 a 3,6% daling van de Belgische groothandelsprijzen voor elektriciteit. Met volledige Prinses Elisabethzone er bij nog steeds minder dan 6% impact. linkedin.com/posts/simon-de…
Nederlands
10
4
11
6.7K
Eric Corijn
Eric Corijn@EricCorijn·
Het gehele debat over de verschillende klimaatscenarios kan toch niet verbloemen dat de doelstellingen van de akkoorden van Parijs niet worden gehaald.
Nederlands
14
2
13
1.6K
Andreas Tirez
Andreas Tirez@andreastirez·
Daarom dat FR, UK, FI, CZ, NL, IT, VS,... nieuwe steenkoolmijnen, ah nee, kerncentrales willen bouwen Echt, welk niveau is dit?
Andreas Tirez tweet media
Nederlands
29
29
130
7.4K
Andreas Tirez
Andreas Tirez@andreastirez·
@Laveyne_J De baseload forward spread met buurlanden was eind 2024 6 €/MWh hoger voor 2026 dan voor 2025. Dat is reëel. De rest zijn simulaties. Ik zou ook graag modellen willen zien die huidige spread tussen FR en BE-NL-GE correct simuleren.
Nederlands
0
0
0
22
Joannes Laveyne
Joannes Laveyne@Laveyne_J·
@andreastirez Waargenomen prijzen vloeien voort uit een niet-lineair optimalisatieproces waarin de aanwezigheid van Belgische kernenergie een input is. Het aannemen van afwezigheid er van verandert de optimalisatie zelf, dus je kunt nieuwe prijzen niet afleiden uit oude. /
Nederlands
2
0
0
104
Andreas Tirez
Andreas Tirez@andreastirez·
@Laveyne_J FBMC resultaten met helft minder export capaciteit van FR naar andere Core landen en meer naar Italië-noord: ik zou het model eens willen zien dat dat meegerekend heeft
Nederlands
1
0
1
69