[locallost]

I don't get this bogus argument. Germany is using the least coal in its history for electricity. The data is very easy to find, but it's a knee jerk reaction that they got rid of nuclear and so they must've replaced it with coal. Not true at all, and it's getting tiring reading this nonsense.

[_ph_]

50% of the German electricity are now renewable, wind, solar, biomass, water. In 2022, Germany was creating and exporting a considerable chunk of electricity to help plugging the holes left by the switched off French reactors.

[illiarian]

They replaced it with coal, gas and biofuel (that is, burning more stuff): https://twitter.com/energybants/status/1647799729734971396

[locallost]

It's nonsense. Look at the production for the year for the last 10 years, not a snapshot of a nuclear lobbyist.

[illiarian]

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35660264

[locallost]

So it matters when wind is providing 20%, but it doesn't matter when it's providing 100%. Thus, even though coal use is at a historic low, it's actually increasing, and in other news water is dry and grass is red.

[illiarian]

> So it matters when wind is providing 20%, but it doesn't matter when it's providing 100%.

Of course. Because when there's no electricity, there's no electricity.

> even though coal use is at a historic low, it's actually increasing

You pretend this is a contradiction when it's not. Germany has just shut down its last reactors. So yes, the usage of coal will increase because when renewable generation is low you still need to provide electricity. Guess what provides that electricity.

[locallost]

No. Germany already began shutting down reactors in 2011 and coal use continued to go down. The proof is in the pudding -- data beats predictions.

The rise in renewables will continue to decrease coal use. Deadline for coal is 2038, with possibly moving it to 2030.