| ▲ | fabian2k 3 hours ago | |
It was cheaper, I don't think it's much more complex than that. And with fossil fuels, countries without significant local production are always dependent on someone else, with most potential suppliers being problematic in some way. Of course we should have gone for renewable energy more forcefully, but that wouldn't have resolved the issue. That change will take time, and you can't arbitrarily accelerate it. | ||
| ▲ | throwaway473825 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
No, gas has always been the most expensive source of electricity. Take a look at the German merit order from 2018: https://www.ffe.de/en/publications/merit-order-shifts-and-th... Nuclear is cheapest, then lignite, then hard coal, and then gas. Germany phased out the cheapest option first, now continues with the second, and is expanding the most expensive. The obvious choice would have been to do what China and India are doing - phase out gas power first and focus on electrification. But Europe did the opposite. | ||
| ▲ | mytailorisrich 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
Well the US benefit massively because of their investments in shale gas. Meanwhile the Europe suffers massively and they banned shale gas although they could exploit vast resources. Sure, the environment, etc but Europe hasn't invested strategically in that, either. China has. | ||