[illiarian]

> Germany would have had to burn coal that night anyway

But much, much less coal.

> The output of the remaining 3 reactors would have been only a fraction of the electricity requirements anyway.

That is s great way to say: we killed our stable source of electricity because of populism, and now we're burying our head in the sand justifying our decision.

> production capacity will be filled in soon.

Soon when? And the question of quiet nights remains

[_ph_]

Somewhat less coal. We are talking about 3 GW less nuclear in a Grid which draws like 50. And yes, that were only the last nuclear reactors. But a lot of them would have had to be decommissioned anyway and there are still the problems of cost, especially of the nuclear waste etc. A large part of these 3 GW will be replaced even in 2023 and that will continue through the years. The current plans aim for 80 renewables in 2030.

[illiarian]

I forgot to mention in the sibling comment:

> in a Grid which draws like 50.

Installed wind capacity in Germany is 65GW. Seems to be much higher than what grid demands.

And yet, on April 15th it was producing only 5% of that. And solar was producing zero.

Guess where the power to cover that came from?

Even today on a reasonably windy day (at least in Hamburg where I am right now) wind production is at 20% capacity, solar at 36 capacity.

Busy burning coal for 21% of electricity even on a windy day.

[Schroedingersat]

You sure are fixated on nameplate numbers for those renewables that replaced all of the nuclear fleet and a third of the coal fleet already.

[illiarian]

> We are talking about 3 GW less nuclear in a Grid which draws like 50.

6%

> A large part of these 3 GW will be replaced even in 2023

0% of solar generation and 5% of wind generation will be replaced with what exactly?