[pfdietz]

That report is from 2020. Costs have fallen greatly since then, particularly for battery storage. And even so, that report doesn't say fossil fuels are needed (although the "net zero" solution still is allowed to burn some, I'm guessing because CO2 absorbed into the oceans isn't being counted?) It even says explicitly that hydrogen would be used for long term storage! See pages 5 and 6.

With hydrogen available renewables can straightforwardly get to 100%. Germany has plenty of geology for hydrogen storage. As I mentioned elsewhere, long term thermal storage is also a possibility, with recent developments there suggesting very competitive capex.

[looping__lui]

Thats like available technology at German industry-need scale?

[pfdietz]

If not, grow that industry. Just like one would have to do with nuclear if one were to adopt that technology. You do realize that existing burner reactors cannot power the world for more than a few decades, right? The available cheap uranium runs out. Breeder reactors are not commercially available, or available at a cost competitive even with existing commercial burner reactors.

(The French have given up on their breeder development program, cancelling Astrid, the proposed next project, until at least 2050.)

Renewables and storage seem much more quickly scalable than nuclear, as demonstrated by the yearly percentage rate of increase in their deployment.