> 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

> 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