6 ms·
Not just any coal, but lignite, the nastiest, dirtiest kind of coal. Definitely greener than nuclear. /s
by ChuckNorris89 4y ago
Not just any coal, but lignite, the nastiest, dirtiest kind of coal. Definitely greener than nuclear. /s
- this_user 4y agohttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/Energymix_Germany.svg/2560px-Energymix_Germany.svg.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/En...
- jenadine 4y agoImagine if they had been growing the nuclear instead of reducing it, it would have allowed to almost get rid of lignite and coal. Instead it is still a portion. (And solar and wind being intermittent you can't just have that)
- 0x073 4y agoNulcear is only for base load, coal can be used for medium spikes. Nuclear can't replace coal for this.
- Aeolun 4y agoI’m inclined to believe solar and wind have similar percentages of storage available.
- yodelshady 4y agoThat's just a lie.
- amadeuspagel 4y agoGraph only goes until 2020.
- yodelshady 4y agoAny chart that misses 2022 in Germany's consumption is just mendacious.
- concordDance 4y agoWhat happened then and do you have a graph that includes it?
- skrause 4y agoAnd yet Germany has fewer CO2 emissions per kWh of electricity produced than the USA.
- ChuckNorris89 4y agoYeah but you're breathing coal dust
- Robotbeat 4y agoBarely. It's not really much different. For the full year 2021, about 350gCO2/kWh in Germany vs 375gCO2/kWh. Germany spent an insane amount of money, punished the use of electricity effectively (therefore undermining their own competitiveness in EVs), caused a significantly negative impact on household finances and industrial competitiveness (to the advantage of coal-powered China) and still only gets roughly US level of cleanliness in electricity. Because they simultaneously decided to get rid of nuclear power plants. shrug
- IdiocyInAction 4y agoAlso the only fossil fuel Germany has in abundance in its own territory.