I hope it doesn't surprise anyone. Most energy transition strategies relied on natural gas to phase out coal. When there is a problem regarding the natural gas supply (ukraine war, iran war, [add the 5 next oil crises / wars here] ), they restart / use more / don't phase out fast enough coal power plants. It'll be the same thing everywhere in the world where they use coal.
26
daguerrotype_typeMar 29, 2026
+23
There's also the fact that Germany closed down nuclear plants. Which I think shouldn't have been a priority even in comparison with gas plants.
23
IntelArtiGenMar 29, 2026
+16
Clearly it was the worst choice for the climate, but I guess they didn't care about the climate when they did it. I don't really know what they cared about frankly because coal power plants emit particulate matters which kill thousands of people every year in Europe. It's like a constant nuclear accident, but because we don't see this pollution coming from a big explosion I guess for many people it's better.
16
12_yo_girlMar 29, 2026
+12
Right around the time Fukushima happened, the anti-nuclear movement was at its height.
Merkel went with the Zeitgeist, it was a popular decision among the general public, where many were reminded of Chernobyl 'and that you can’t eat some mushrooms in Bavaria still', and business leaders liked it because it meant they didn’t have to maintain nuclear reactors that were nearing their end of life cycle.
12
IntelArtiGenMar 29, 2026
+1
And never at that time they asked scientists "hey, is coal killing more people than nuclear energy?".
I hope they didn't confuse deaths from the tsunami in Japan and deaths related to the NPP accident. Because, to me, the nuclear accident in Fukushima was the proof nuclear reactors are much safer now. When you compare the radioactivity released during Fukushima & Chernobyl I think it's 10 / 100 times lower: https://www.unscear.org/unscear/uploads/documents/unscear-reports/UNSCEAR_2020_21_Report_Vol.II-CORR.pdf - Table B1
> emergency workes / Collective effective dose: 61000 man Sv - 860 man Sv
> radioiodine in thyroid: 400000 - 1200
> average dose to residents / evacuees: 50 - (0.05 to 6)
I don't want to minimize how serious these accidents are, but if we spend 1h talking about how bad the Fukushima nuclear accident was, we should spend 1000 hours talking about how bad coal power plants are. Even if we don't care about climate change it's so much worse, and when you factor in the damage caused by climate change I don't even understand how we can spend time talking about Fukushima. We're just minimizing how bad coal power plants are.
1
12_yo_girlMar 29, 2026
+1
Listnookor response.
General public is unable to make an informed decision, be it through apathy, ignorance or simply misdirection.
Nuclear hasn’t been really that popular, Fukushima put a nail in the coffin.
1
Logitech4873Mar 29, 2026
+1
> Listnookor response.
You're literally posting on Listnook
1
LokiWinterwindMar 29, 2026
+92
This is coming from Katherina Reiche, former Energy Lobyist and now unfortunately now economy and energy minister.
It comes to no surprise that she hates renewable energy and sabotages every project she can and uses this and every other crisis to bring us back to the bad old days.
92
Moist-Highway-6787Mar 29, 2026
-4
Coal can't price compete, so you should really care. It's obviously the next viable fossil fuel energy source for power generation over natural gas considering most places existing infrastructure.
We aren't talking about what can be done with 10-20 more years of solar and grid installs, we are talking about what can be done in the next 12-18 months.
So.. yeah.. nice you want to help, but sometimes helping without knowing what you're talking about isn't actually helping.
Coal and gas will get phased out by solar and grid batteries ever falling costs, but it's not magic, batteries and grid infrastructure takes a couple decades to build up to that level no matter how hard you try and we really did have to wait for grid batteries to get at least this good.. and ideally still quite a bit better.
EVs will catch on, but a car is a big purchase price and the used market and charging options do have to grow. That too takes decades more or less no matter what we do, rushing it just makes everything cost more and ensures more screw ups. The tech is moving about as fast as it can as most progress is and has been bottlenecked by battery technology for decades.
If you have some awesome battery innovation to speed things up... please stop holding back, otherwise unhelpful logic is not helpful.
-4
ChaosOrnateMar 29, 2026
+1
Germany started phasing out nuclear power in 2011. There's been your 10 to 20 years to phase in renewable energy. The unhelpful logic is the decision to have not done so already.
1
Anteater776Mar 29, 2026
+1
Yeah and we have had conservatives shoving fossil fuels down our throats the last 20 years as well. It’s always „but we need to do something right now, it’s not the time to comprehensively prepare for renewables!“
Until the next crisis, rinse and repeat. Thoughts and prayers while we work on making fossil fuels more ingrained so that there’s even more suffering during the next crisis.
1
13ameMar 29, 2026
+1
Nuclear energy is literally right there and you are talking about coal and gas.
1
justanaccountname12Mar 29, 2026
+1
They wanted to get rid of nuclear. They literally blew them up.
1
Chrono_ConvoyMar 29, 2026
+6
In consideration the government has asked its citizens to act more naughty in hopes of increased fuel output from Santa
6
T00ddMar 29, 2026
+1
They shut down all their nuclear plants in last two decades, which were generating 25% of power needed.
1
I_Push_ButtonzMar 29, 2026
+1
Well yeah, what if they got hit by a 9.0 earthquake and subsequent 40m tsunami like Japan? Such disasters are commonplace in Germany. The risk was too great.
/s
1
Ewy_KablewyMar 29, 2026
+1
Stupidest decision they have made in modern times. Well, until now: lets ramp up coal a known pollution source, but lets end nuclear which isn't anywhere as environmentally damaging, but lets keep that anti nuclear fear mongering going for no f****** good reason.
1
XhaierrMar 29, 2026
+14
We‘ve actually been/are on a really good path to decrease the need of coal and other fossil fuels. The Christian based government is hugely backed by those lobbies though, therefore the modernization and construction of new renewable energy sources is slowing down more and more. The only viable solution is renewable energy
14
BJonker1Mar 29, 2026
+7
Why do Christians care so little about the planet god gave them?
7
Aldnoah_TharsisMar 29, 2026
+12
Cause it doesn't make them money. They aren't christian, they created their own false effigy/idol/god.
12
MuseumsAfterDarkMar 29, 2026
+1
You don't know? Why, Jesus is going to come down from the heavens on the back of a pterodactyl, wizard's staff in his hand, and fix everything. The same Jesus who chose a pedophile to carry out His will on earth. You know, for lack of better stewards.
1
CaptainCanuck93Mar 29, 2026
+1
Were you on that path?
Whenever I look at the daily CO2 per capita for electricity generation, Germany is almost always producing 10X more than France.
The intermittency of wind/solar means your system needs deployable power, which in reality means it forces Germany to remain dependent on fossil fuels a substantial portion of the day, while France produces very little CO2 for its nuclear based electrical grid
1
BadtrainwreckMar 29, 2026
+1
They’ll do anything except pressure America to stop its war with Iran.
1
daguerrotype_typeMar 29, 2026
+34
And all because nuclear wasn't clean enough. Hope coal will be green.
34
Mother_Antelope_4358Mar 29, 2026
+6
Nah, because it wasn’t considered safe enough after Fukushima and the German states are not willing to store the waste.
Bavaria does everything to fight looking for suitable places to store it while demanding to get it back.
What should be criticized is Germany lacking in renewables.
In the early 2000s we were the world‘s leading developer & manufacturer of solar energy, then the conservatives cut all funding and we willingly gave that industry to China while now crying about being dependent on China.
Absolutely laughable.
6
universe_fuk8rMar 29, 2026
+9
Ah yes. Because coal is so very f****** safe.
9
Mother_Antelope_4358Mar 29, 2026
+5
Wind and solar. F*** coal.
5
polar_noppositeMar 29, 2026
+7
Nuclear deaths per kwh vs coal
7
JahwioMar 29, 2026
+1
Then build a nuclear power plant. Like France or the UK. Tell me how that's going. When will they be ready again? And what about them to be shut down in summer? Insurance costs? Where do you put the nuclear waste?
Using coal is stupid and it was stupid to reduce investing in renewables.
But as a backup energy source nuclear is cleaner but even more stupid since they are not easily activated and started.
1
Mother_Antelope_4358Mar 29, 2026
-7
Duration of a land being uninhabitable after a AKW exploding vs. after a wind mill or solar park exploding?
-7
MetalBawxMar 29, 2026
+1
Modern reactors cannot explode like Chornobyl did.
1
polar_noppositeMar 29, 2026
+1
Do you mean with reactor designs from the 1960s or after 60+ years of improvement?
1
asdhjasdhlkjashdhgfMar 29, 2026
+2
and same with manufacturing robotics, world leading german KUKA became chinese because a federal government was unable to keep their marbles home and the growing market with deep pockets was guess what - china. The economic pressure that allowed those decisions was considerably enforced as result of trade imbalance from larger players completely lost in c**** buy power outperforming labor costs in the western world.
2
ComeOnIWantUsernameMar 29, 2026
+1
> What should be criticized is Germany lacking in renewables.
Lol what? In 2025 56% of electricity in Germany was from renewables
1
swiftpwnsMar 29, 2026
-6
China burns the most coal ever and never stopped. A lot of their renewables are fake props for propaganda
-6
Mother_Antelope_4358Mar 29, 2026
+4
China rapidly increases renewable energy, way more than increasing coal.
„China is experiencing an unprecedented boom in clean energy, with solar and wind capacity expanding at a record pace. In 2025, non-fossil power reached 42% of total generation, with solar alone covering 50% of new investment. While coal consumption is peaking, renewables currently meet over 80% of China's new power demand.
ember-energy.org
Key Trends in China's Energy Growth
Solar and Wind Dominance:
China is the world leader in renewable installation, contributing more than half of the global increase in wind and solar power in 2024. Solar capacity increased by 45% to 887 GW, and wind grew by 18% to 521 GW in 2024.„
German conservatives fucked Germany to unimagible degrees and keep doing so.
4
thereoncewasahatMar 29, 2026
+5
Well done, Merkel.
5
missurunhaMar 29, 2026
+1
The decision to phase out Nuclear Energy was from way before Merkel became PM. And whoever did it, did with its population approval, one of the first things I noticed when I came to germany were protests against a nuclear plant \*\*in Belgium\*\* cause it was too close to germany.
1
diener1Mar 29, 2026
+4
Nuclear cannot survive without implicit government subsidies. No insurance company is willing to take on that risk for a price the nuclear plants can afford.
4
Gold-Butterfly-6347Mar 29, 2026
+3
It really has nothing to do with nuclear, but all with the lack of a greater expansion of renewables. Don't get how people make the nuclear connection to anything, but in reality, it's just bs.
Stop spreading nonsense like this.
3
mdedetrichMar 29, 2026
+1
Renewables are intermittent, you can only push them so far because in the end you need stable power when Dunkelflaute happens. There are other issues as well, i.e. the necessary grid expansion becomes prohibitively more expensive the more you push it.
Germany already has one of the highest installations of renewables, pushing this more isn't going to solve the current problems.
1
Anteater776Mar 29, 2026
Kind of a weird opportunity to bring up nuclear because you can’t spontaneously increase their output during an energy crisis. So unless you are near 100% nuclear, increased gas/oil prices would always be compensated by coal in Germany.
0
daguerrotype_typeMar 29, 2026
+8
If a higher percentage of energy is nuclear you'd need to replace less gas with coal.
8
Ass_Eater_Mar 29, 2026
+1
Incredibly dumb comment. If you had a higher percentage of nuclear power in the mix, you wouldn't have to fire up as much coal now.
1
BruvvimirMar 29, 2026
+1
It’s tragic that Germany finds itself at this point, given that they had a modern, safe, clean nuclear generating fleet.
1
StaticSystemShockMar 29, 2026
+1
Good job Germany, you dum dums went closing nuclear power plants and now you're burning coal like it's year 1800 again...
1
erouzMar 29, 2026
+5
Wait is EU wasn't one pressuring Poland to close all quality coal mining?
5
NoSwordfish1978Mar 29, 2026
+6
It's not like they had access to a source of clean energy production but decided to shut it down instead!
6
AvibuelMar 29, 2026
+2
Anything to avoid using nuclear energy.
Good thing we are using the clean energy source now.... *Checks notes* - coal. /S
Who knows, maybe we start doing steam again, hauptsache atomkraft nein danke
2
BanCeakieMar 29, 2026
+1
Coal power plants should be so much simpler to use and switch on/off on demand, so not like they don't have any advantage over nuclear.
If there would be massive volcanic eruption and half of the sky would be covered in "volcanic smoke" you still would rather just "invest more in solar" rather than use what needs to be used now?
1
leisurechefMar 29, 2026
+2
Either that or start stockpiling Chinese Yuan
2
TailungFuMar 29, 2026
+2
Poland: "well well well"
2
SyriseUnseenMar 29, 2026
+1
I've seen this exact headline from politico like 4 times. As of today, it was wrong every single one.
1
HyperNova1000Mar 29, 2026
+2
Hey germany, what happened to net zero emissions by 2045 and to reducing emissions by more than 50% by 2030? weren't you supposed to be LESS dependant on oil and gas at this point?
2
SpinnwebenMar 29, 2026
+9
Don't fall for Politico's lobby money infused nothingburger populism bullshit! They are very carefully tiptoeing around claims they could actually have to call names and show proof for ... or get fined.
As of [the 2024 government report](https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/presse/pressemitteilungen/klimaziele-bis-2030-erreichbar), Germany was even ahead of reaching the 2030 goal of cutting greenhouse emissions of 1990 by 63% , although some parameters are casting doubts now.
If we look at Ukraine, Iran, Trump, and the rise of right wingnut parties in Europe and Germany, importing enough oil and gas seems to get more expensive every day.
The call for burning more coal is an expected knee jerk reflex of the lobbies and the Russian directed troll armies.
9
ConsequenceNo2571Mar 29, 2026
+14
Crises have effects, believe it or not
14
mastil12345668Mar 29, 2026
+10
It was their own crisis made by them, it would not be as bad if they didnt shut down their reactors
10
dopamin778Mar 29, 2026
Hey you, are you aware we live in 2026 and also 50% by 2030 is still 50%.
Yes, less dependant not Independent.
But sure we can all live in dreams and hopes
0
Several_Magician1541Mar 29, 2026
+5
Damn too bad they didn't have access to nuclear energy.
5
PommesMayoMar 29, 2026
+1
Or, you know, we could just build more wind turbines and solar parks. That stuff that gives you energy for free
Edit: before people comment, yes, I know that these things cost money to build hand have to deliver x amount of energy before actually being profitable. And yes, I also know how much jobs are tied to the coal industry here and that these people can’t transition over to the green energy sector. But still, wind and sunshine is happening anyway so might as well use it
1
missurunhaMar 29, 2026
+1
Its so funny seeing americans "protesting" this while emitting 2\~4 times more CO2 per capta. Do as I say, not as I do.
1
W1shm4sterMar 29, 2026
+1
Imagine if we didn’t just shut off our nuclear power plants.
We had not enough replacements and that came around a time, when electricity got expensive every time and was just a matter of by how much it increased.
1
germanchimera292Mar 29, 2026
+1
This is the way!
1
Top-Handle4786Mar 29, 2026
+2
Good job shutting down all those NPPs, f****** idiots.
2
ExpertPathMar 29, 2026
+1
For Germany that would be a smart move - they have insane amounts of coal there
1
soulstormfireMar 29, 2026
+1
That was to be expected. The CDU is aggressivly pro fossil fuel.
1
Ellamhdava43Mar 29, 2026
-1
Fumbling the nuclear bag just to speedrun back to the 1800s coal era is actually wild. A massive L.
-1
wulv8022Mar 29, 2026
This government is a big joke. Pethatic.
0
Several_Ant_9867Mar 29, 2026
+1
Every comment in this post talks about nuclear. They are not sponsored bots. For sure not
69 Comments