3 ms·

>Germany is already the largest electricity exporter on the planet This is not relevant, again, unless it would be impractical to install more transmission lin

by scythe 4y ago

>Germany is already the largest electricity exporter on the planet This is not relevant, again, unless it would be impractical to install more transmission lines. >renewable share Using the wrong statistic is not a good comparison, what matters is the fraction of fossil fuels. The classification of "renewables" here is crafted to specifically exclude nuclear while for some absurd reason permitting hydropower (which is terrible for river ecosystems). If you invent a metric specifically to support your ideology, it supports your ideology. However, it doesn't convince anyone who is paying attention to the facts. >it's extremely questionable how Germany gets constantly blamed It's not Germany that is truly to blame. It's the anti-nuclear movement which is to blame, and Germany is just one of its many victims. However, this movement led Germany to make bad decisions recently, and those decisions can be criticized specifically, regardless of what else was done.

freeflight 4y ago
> This is not relevant, again, unless it would be impractical to install more transmission lines. It is very relevant, why should all the burden to fix all the worlds problems fall exclusively on Germany when Germany already has done so much and was literally the first to recognize the problem? > The classification of "renewables" here is crafted to specifically exclude nuclear Yes, because uranium is not a renewable resource, it's actually a very finite resource. And if you want to see "wrong statistics" playing around with stuff like that, then you need to look at the UK who gets absurdly inflated "electricity from CO2 free sources" shares so it can act like its energy sector is renewable and sustainable, when it's really not. > It's not Germany that is truly to blame. It's the anti-nuclear movement which is to blame Just two paragraphs ago you were arguing for Germany to fix it, and now it's some "anti-nuclear movement to blame", all under a submission that comes from a rather questionable source, with its very own lobby, to begin with [0] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32153029 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32153029

by scythe 4y ago

freeflight 4y ago

> This is not relevant, again, unless it would be impractical to install more transmission lines. It is very relevant, why should all the burden to fix all the worlds problems fall exclusively on Germany when Germany already has done so much and was literally the first to recognize the problem? > The classification of "renewables" here is crafted to specifically exclude nuclear Yes, because uranium is not a renewable resource, it's actually a very finite resource. And if you want to see "wrong statistics" playing around with stuff like that, then you need to look at the UK who gets absurdly inflated "electricity from CO2 free sources" shares so it can act like its energy sector is renewable and sustainable, when it's really not. > It's not Germany that is truly to blame. It's the anti-nuclear movement which is to blame Just two paragraphs ago you were arguing for Germany to fix it, and now it's some "anti-nuclear movement to blame", all under a submission that comes from a rather questionable source, with its very own lobby, to begin with [0] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32153029 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32153029