Right… the country that basically brought solar to the point of cheap mass production years ago while also having double the average EU renewable share in their energy mix is the bad one…
… in some alternate reality produced by propaganda-induced brain-damage.
Because all those people parroting the always same wrong narratives are in fact actively fighting to burn our planet down because “your solution is the wrong one! <insert random fossil fuel lobbyists here> told me!”. That immense stupidity was funny in the beginning, but many years later the majority is still stuck in some delusional insanity of discussing nuclear power vs. renewables (*). Of which “look how that country massively investing in renewables is actually bad and increasing fossil fuels (they don’t), especially after they killed perfect well-working (they weren’t) nuclear reactors to burn more coal (coal use actually went down massively to 1960s levels)” is one of the core narratives. And at some point it’s getting tedious to read the same bullshit for the 100th time just this week…
(*) there are only two viable models for clean energy: renewables+short term storage+long term storage and renewables+nuclear+less short-term storage+long storage… (And the latter option has much higher upfront costs and also doesn’t have any effect for more than a decade until the reactors are build. So given the time frame after decades of delaying any action it makes only sense for countries having a high amount of nuclear production build already… so for France and basically no one else.)
What’s the other big narrative (besides peretending that storage is only needed for renewables of course)? How we actually have no clue how to solve the (already solved) issue of storage. What a coincidence…
PS: Also that fucking brain-rot is what now enables conservatives in Germany to slow down energy transition yet again.
It’s basically a loop of “we don’t do enough to protect against climate change” -> “so it doesn’t work” -> “guess we don’t have a solution yet, so let’s keep doing nothng until we find an imaginary new one”.
And it’s purely driven by “countries investing in renewables are actually bad/stupid”, “we will totally build nuclear power instead soon™” and “more renewables aren’t viable without storage; storage isn’t viable (at all or without more renewables we refuse to build)”.
Right… the country that basically brought solar to the point of cheap mass production years ago while also having double the average EU renewable share in their energy mix is the bad one…
… in some alternate reality produced by propaganda-induced brain-damage.
No need to insult me with cheap shots.
I’m referring to the changes made by the energy ministry.
But sure, let’s call me brain damaged.
You too have a good day pal.
your point is valid, but why be so abrasive about it?
Because all those people parroting the always same wrong narratives are in fact actively fighting to burn our planet down because “your solution is the wrong one! <insert random fossil fuel lobbyists here> told me!”. That immense stupidity was funny in the beginning, but many years later the majority is still stuck in some delusional insanity of discussing nuclear power vs. renewables (*). Of which “look how that country massively investing in renewables is actually bad and increasing fossil fuels (they don’t), especially after they killed perfect well-working (they weren’t) nuclear reactors to burn more coal (coal use actually went down massively to 1960s levels)” is one of the core narratives. And at some point it’s getting tedious to read the same bullshit for the 100th time just this week…
(*) there are only two viable models for clean energy: renewables+short term storage+long term storage and renewables+nuclear+less short-term storage+long storage… (And the latter option has much higher upfront costs and also doesn’t have any effect for more than a decade until the reactors are build. So given the time frame after decades of delaying any action it makes only sense for countries having a high amount of nuclear production build already… so for France and basically no one else.)
What’s the other big narrative (besides peretending that storage is only needed for renewables of course)? How we actually have no clue how to solve the (already solved) issue of storage. What a coincidence…
PS: Also that fucking brain-rot is what now enables conservatives in Germany to slow down energy transition yet again.
It’s basically a loop of “we don’t do enough to protect against climate change” -> “so it doesn’t work” -> “guess we don’t have a solution yet, so let’s keep doing nothng until we find an imaginary new one”.
And it’s purely driven by “countries investing in renewables are actually bad/stupid”, “we will totally build nuclear power instead soon™” and “more renewables aren’t viable without storage; storage isn’t viable (at all or without more renewables we refuse to build)”.