Not really. Coal was just a temporary replacement, and mostly not for nuclear plants.
> and mostly not for nuclear plants.
electricity is fungible.
It doesn't matter what electricity the coal is intending to replace, as long as _any_ coal is being turned into electricity, that's coal that could not have been burned if a nuclear plant was generating that electricity instead
Which is irrelevant. Electricity is not the main purpose of coal.
The argument is that we could have kept nuclear running and shut down all coal. In 1990, nuclear power plants were producing 153TWh in Germany. Today, coal+nuclear together is producing about as much.
5 years ago it was significant higher. And in 5 years it will significant lower again. Germany is in a process of change.
> The argument is that we could have kept nuclear running and shut down all coal.
Which is wrong. Nuclear can't replace gas, which coal is replacing. And Nuclear plants have no fuel anymore and lacking up-to-date certification. There was zero chance to continue running since 2019, even if we ignore all the other problems.