> without considering the direct consequences of these actions
And the best example of that in Germany is Hambacher Forst. Return to coal is a direct result of moving away from nuclear. Nuts.
And the best example of that in Germany is Hambacher Forst. Return to coal is a direct result of moving away from nuclear. Nuts.
It's also interesting that nobody was saying that the Atomaustieg was responsible for increased coal use in 2020. Because it's only last year that was an exceptional year, which saw a uptick in coal vs wind.
https://jancovici.com/en/energy-transition/long-series/germa...
Your link says that oil is (in 2017) the primary source of energy. Followed by gas. Then coal. Edit: When I ignoring wood.
Germany's buying cheap energy from coal burning Poland so it might as well have.
Call it outsourcing of coal burning if that makes it easier to take in.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hambach_surface_mine
> Begun in 1978, the mine's operation area currently (as of end of 2017) has a size of 43,8 km2, with the total area designated for mining having a size of 85 km2.
So there's still a bit to dig.