| > Not "who". "What". And the answer is "the data". The data say that. Why don't you link to "the data" then? > And nuclear did not peak in the 90s. 2024 was a record production year, I just gave you a source which proves my statement and shows that yours is a lie. Just like everything else you added to it. > And intermittent renewables are ... intermittent ... and therefore cannot actually completely replace fossil fuels. Weird how they can't but already do. Must be some kind of magic eh? > Only in the renewbro-bubble are nuclear and renewables mutually exclusive. Nope. This is a lie also :) Nuclear clogs up transmission ways when it's not necessary. This is a fact and happens today. > Here's the Finnish environment minister: Why not add the French environment minister also? You can add as many ministers as you want, the world doesn't care. The money goes into renewables and they're the future. Here is the source again: https://ourworldindata.org/electricity-mix |
Your source shows exactly that what I said is the truth, and that you are lying.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-production-by...
The highest number for nuclear electricity production are 2024 and 2025, with 2025 being slightly higher than 2024.
Well presumably you are not aware that you are spreading falsehoods, so it's not technically a lie. Though it's so egregious that it might just be.> Nuclear clogs up transmission ways when it's not necessary.
Haven't heard that joke in a long time. Good one!