Although he directly cites Habeck explaining the situation, the author does not understand his point:
There is no electricity shortage in germany, there is a large dependency of the industry on natural gas in production processes. Sometimes used for heating, which might get substituted by elctrical heating. More often gas is used in chemical processes, where there is no direct substitute.
This is not true. There are multiple energy providers selling only renewables. There even is one village that managed to do so on its own for itself.
Your argumentation is wrong. What you say is: There is no use in limiting pollution, because there will still be some pollution left anyways. I bet you never clean your place, because it will get dirty soon after.
While you do make a fair point on greenwashing being a problem in general, your opinion does not apply to my non greenwashed contract. 100% green energy and a coop investing heavily in more capacity.
This is true for gas (heating) and electricity, btw.
This op-ed is getting things so utterly wrong, I don‘t even know where to start.
The Energiewende (so cool he can make use of a german word, so much credibility) here in Germany is working just fine. It is a reasonable investment in our future.
The reason natural gas is a problem right now is not that we have insufficient energy. The lack of gas is problematic because it is a preliminary product used in chemical processes. This is where a looming recession might derive from.
On sustainable energy sources: I, as many other germans, receive all of my electricity from purely renewable energy sources for more than ten years now. 24/7.
On nuclear: The cost of nuclear power is wildly underestimated, especially for the generation of nuclear power plants in use right now. They are expensive both in terms of dollars and in terms of their ecological footprint.