Don't.
Compare.
Percentages.
Stand-up Maths called this out recently and it's good to mention. I think this might be the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aokNwKx7gM8
Give me the output and our total consumption please.
Compare.
Percentages.
Stand-up Maths called this out recently and it's good to mention. I think this might be the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aokNwKx7gM8
Give me the output and our total consumption please.
Percentage here is used as a ratio of total output and a decline in that ratio over time is a decline in role. Exactly what the articles headline asserts. It doesn't matter that nuclear may have grown in absolute numbers. The assertion is that its role has declined which is true.
Could we put enough fancy light bulbs and triple glazed windows and heat pumps out there to run everything on nuclear (I am biased against nuclear but I'm also biased against coal externalities) and solar/wind? What's our shortfall? In this case it's not the % of nuclear I care about. It's how much base load it can provide.
Bad budgeting is one of my peeves about software and so I get a little grumpy when I see it happening elsewhere.
Basically you can only compare (or add, or subtract) percentages if the quantities they represent are exactly equal. And since the quantities of power production change from year to year, they're doing the same thing he's complaining about.