Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist
Yes 6% is not a ton. It wouldn't be easy, but their mix shifts by more than that yearly as the chart shows. I agree it's stupid because it would probably increase coal further but I'm simply saying the remaining plants closing wouldn't be catastrophic. Heck, their electricity consumption dropped by more than 6% in a year due to demand destruction and efficiencies. I simply don't think it's a big issue.
Again, ending nuclear was and continuing it is stupid. My point is simply that these last 3 are not a big part of the mix anymore and keeping them open or closing then ain't that much of a deal.
Why? I dunno. It is stupid. But "lol only 6%" is the same percentage regardless of size. Their ability to absorb a change by 6% in a year is well demonstrated in these charts. Their electricity consumption is dropping and their mix is constantly changing. It would be stupid, but not a big deal
|
Because 6% of a large economy impacts overall demand for alternatives to base load... If it was 6% of Luxemburg it would be a drop in the bucket. Its replacement would require fighting for more mcf of natural gas, more coal, etc.