If Germany had kept its 2010 nuclear power plant fleet operation they would've practically eliminated all fossil fuels from their electricity generation by now. Instead Germany remains the single largest polluter in western Europe per kwh generated with their emissions frequently reaching 20x-30x that of France and are on average 10x higher. During 2022 and 2023 they literally brought back online coal powerplants and even expanded a coal mine as opposed to maintaining their last 3 NPP's, which they shut down in 2023.Germany in 2010 still had roughly 20GW of nuclear capacity which means >~160 TWh at 90% capacity factor >~130 TWh at 75% capacity factor. In 2025 Germany produced:>95 TWh from coal>65 TWh of gasEven in 2022, before the last plants were shut down, Germany still produced 6% of its electricity from nuclear or roughly 32TWh representing 0.07% of all emissions generated in regards to electricity generation that year. You heard it right, 6% produced 0.07% of emissions. I think we should flog a random German daily for this act of enviromental terrorism.prove me wrongpro tip: you can't.
>>17036999Even some eastern European states decarbonized its electricity generation faster than Germany. I want to stress that.1990:>Romania, 763 g per kwh>Germany, 652 g per kwh2010:>Romania, 342g per kwh>Germany, 470g per kwh2024:>Romania, 188 g per kwh>Germany, 291 g per kwhSource: European Environment Agency.
>>17036999>>17037004The so called energy transition also known as 'energiewende' cost Germany an estimated 500-700 billion € so far. The results speak for themselves. 4 hours of relative low co2 emissions, still 3x-4x those of France, followed by gas and coal burning and one of the higest electricity prices in the world.In other words, Germany neither produces clean power nor it produces cheap power.
>>17036999>single largest polluter in western Europe per kwh generated with their emissionsWhat weighted or nonweighted basket of "emissions" are you using to quantify "pollution"?
>>17036999There are way more jobs tied up in coal.It's not just about energy production big number line must go up.
>>17037008Lifecycle emissions of electricity generation sources expressed in co2 equivalent per kwh. For example, Germany produced 291g Co2 equivalent per kwh generated in 2024. The EU average was 183g Co2 equivalent per kwh and the lowest was Sweden at 6g Co2 equivalent per kwh.France, which is often used as a counter example to Germany as their generation is primarily nuclear, was at 36g Co2 equivalent per kwh.https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/greenhouse-gas-emission-intensity-of-1Figure 2
>>17037016So why use a generic word like "pollution" when you mean specifically and only "CO2"? It makes your opinion seem ridiculous to both anti-nuke people, who might think nuclear waste is worse by any weighting, and pro-CO2 people, who might think CO2 doesn't even qualify as a (nonlocal) pollutant.
>>17037020Co2 >>equivalent<<, not Co2. Its how emissions are measured and having the highest emissions makes you the largest polluter. But you have to be a special fucking retard to think coal and gas doesn't cause massive pollution.Coal emissions are laden with sulfur dioxide, arsenic, lead, mercury and even fucking radioactive dust. This is fucking common knowledge. Indeed the continued burning of coal is estimated to have caused thousands of excess deaths and billions in damages primarily due to the degradation of air quality.
>>17037021>Co2 >>equivalent<<, not Co2>laden with sulfur dioxide, arsenic, lead, mercury and even fucking radioactive dustLol, that's literally what I asked about, numbnuts; so just replace "pollution" with "* * Co@ EqUiVaLeNt * *"What weighted or nonweighted basket of "emissions" are you using to quantify "CO2 equivalent"?
>>17037024Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize you're a fucking tard.
>>17037027So you have no clue what you're talking about and when someone asks you about it, all you can say is this:>special fucking retard>fucking tard
>>17037030I literally provided you with a link to the EEA. Maybe try reading the 'definition' and 'methodology' posted there? I bet you get called retard a lot, don't you? There's a good reason for that.
>>17037032I will not follow a link. I will judge you on whether or not you know what you're talking about well enough to answer a basic question about it. You can't; all you can do is keep chirping "retard" like a bird-brained bird on a bird feeder.
>Germans burning coal to make rent Somethings never change.
>>17036999>fossil fuelsthat's how you know you're speaking with a niggercattlebrained normoigroid
>>17037050A fossil fuel[a] is a flammable carbon compound- or hydrocarbon-containing material[2] formed naturally in the Earth's crust from the buried remains of prehistoric organisms (animals, plants or microplanktons), a process that occurs within geological formations.Glad I could help
>>17037053What's [a] and [2]?
>>17037054 [a]The term has been considered a misnomer because it does not actually originate from fossils, but from decomposed organic matter.[2] "Fossil fuel". ScienceDaily. Retrieved 29 October 2021.
>>17037059[a] A fossil isn't decomposed organic matter?[2] Now consider [2] following [a] in the same clause and convince me it's not comedy.
>>17037064Oh shit, wait till you find out peanuts are not nuts, tin foil is not made out of tin and jellyfish are not actually fish.
>>17037066Wait till you find out that's not the punchline.
>>17037069Why are you punching lines?
>>17037070Second verse, same as the first >>17037066
>>17036999It sounds completely absurd because you for some unknown reason assume that Germany is an independent state that acts in its own interests. Germany lost a total war and was forced into unconditional surrender, the independent German state was completely disbanded and doesn't exist. Why would occupying powers want Germany to have energy sources not tied to constant fully controllable inflow of hydrocarbons?
>>17037077Why would occupying powers allow Germany to build 30+ reactors in the first place then? They still operated 17 of them by 2010.It's just a self inflicted wound. They decided the best way to lose weight is to cut off their own leg. No doubt Russian money was involved though. Schrode signed into law the first decomissioning under a SPD-Green coalition and signed of on Nordstream just before leaving office. He then took a job at Nordstream, Rosneft and nearly ended up at Gazprom (but Putin chimped out in 2022).Merkel unironically reversed the decision and extended the timeline for a nuclear phase-out. Fukushima in 2011 turned the german publics opinion against and after hundreds of thousands of protestors Merkel finally relented.
>>17037053hydrocarbon fuel isn't made of dinosaur juice niggerbrain, that's goobohomo propaganda earth is flat
>>17037079>Why would occupying powers allow Germany to build 30+ reactors in the first placeWhy wouldn't they? The USSR built nukes in Ukraine, for example. The only counterexample I can think of is South Africa, where the indigenous people living there voluntarily destroyed their own nuclear program rather than gifting it to a bunch of invasive, colonizing savages.
>>17037099>the USSR built nukes in Ukraine, for example.Ukraine was a part of the USSR. Its like saying why the US built nukes in North Dakota.
>>17037101Yes, that's why I used it an example. Germany is also part of the EU.
>>17037103The EU is not a country neither does it control Germany. Indeed Germany has the strongest voice in the EU. This shit is fucking nonsensical and you're all sorts of retarded.
>>17037106>retardedchirp chirp
>>17036999checked. You are probably very right. However you forgot Germany is a vanquished country and the victors want the opposite because they think it's funny. All your calculations are in vain but nice try regardless.
>>17037120still believing in post WW2 propaganda?>victorsOne is dead, the other a mere husk of its former self and currently dismantling its governmental agencies.Nowadays all of WW2 takes place in history books and is irrelevant to present global politics.
>>17037131t. The rest of Europe's paypig gimp.A reality check is in order.
>>17036999stop being russophobic tranny
>>17036999We have a powerful coal lobby. Lignite is one of the most environmentally damaging fossil fuels there is, period. One could argue that we should have shut them down before nuclear, because lignite production killed more people than nuclear did.There is nothing to prove wrong about what you said, it's just way more important to shit on Germany for using coal than it is for them shutting down nuclear, even though I agree the latter is stupid.
>>17036999Isn’t it very likely that’s the better option?1. The German politicians and decision makers are probably bribed/blackmailed with slavic cunnies and shotas.2. Russia and Germany being codependent to each other prevents things escalating to an actual world war.
>>17036999>fraction of a energy mix fraction of a fraction of the worldLike it would make any difference.
>>17036999do you have any gas turbines kicking around
>>17037187>1. The German politicians and decision makers are probably bribed/blackmailed with slavic cunnies and shotas.Some are, Schroder is a primer example.>2. Russia and Germany being codependent to each other prevents things escalating to an actual world war.That was the actual foreign policy of German. Failed spectacularly.
>>17037296Whether or not you think there's a "world war" happening now, the foreign policy of Germany with respect to Russia is something so small and meaningless that no one could ever care about it one way or the other.
>>17037297What the fuck? Germany was what drove European policy towards Russia with no slight annoyance coming from Poland and the Baltic state. The belief that the Russian economy becoming intertwined with Germany and Europe would result in a stable and peaceful Russia that would protect its lucrative trade with German and Europe and as a result maintain that stability was the policy.Russians believed they had leverage over Europe instead, this is what led to war.
>>17036999Pipeline gas is cheaper than LNG and more convenient in a number of applications than nuclear-boiled water. The sudden revival of the nuclear debate is meant to distract from the fact that foreign countries feel entitled to dictate what Germany can buy from Russia and they are lucky to find a compliant German government. I am sure that has nothing to do with the fact that Germany's political system was installed by enemy powers, with whom Germany now happens to be "allied".
>>17037311t.russhit mad they're going broke having to sell below market place to jeets while stuck in a losing war and getting their 'gas station' status revoked via long range drone strikes
>>17037311You are directly funding an aggressor invading a European country because you refuse to buy a slightly more expensive alternative from Norway.
>>17037315Yes, exactly.
>>17037315No one cares about slav(e)s blowing up each other>Europeanlmao
>>17036999True
Lots of NATO Nordstream bombers ITT. Bibi and Don aren't sending their best anymore.
>>17037303>European policyNo one really cares what the EU says about foreign policy. Not since you morons neutered yourselves permanently in WWII.
>>17036999You still need massive amounts of oil and gas for manufacturing and transport.
>>17037580What's this argument supposed to be? Since we use a lot of oil and gas we should use even more?The neat thing about carbon-zero power is that you can start electrifying and massively reduce emissions in almost every other sector. EV using clean power will massively reduce emissions from transport while zero carbon electricity will massively reduce emissions in manufacturing.
>>17037311this, but the dying US empire needs a win against its "opponent" before the death of the petrol dollar marks their ultimate descent into irrelevancy
Yes, it was dumb. The whole world looked at them in disbelief and said: welp, it's dumb. Germans are dumb to do this to themselves.
