![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://slrpnk.net/pictrs/image/e82bd59d-d50f-4917-9301-ab6ce08a6c80.png)
6·
2 months agoAgreed. Or the heating of buildings and warm water. (edit: would also be very! inefficient)
Agreed. Or the heating of buildings and warm water. (edit: would also be very! inefficient)
In this case I think the renewables target is better. CO2 reduction is the goal, but having it as a single target can lead to lock-ins. Especially when the target is only low CO2 and not zero.
E.g. you could reach an 80% goal, while still expanding the use of fossil gas to replace coal and lignite. But we need a system that goes to 100% renewables by 2035. And first ramping up gas to then switch to renewables after is what got Germany in this mess.
Yes. That is how I meant the comment. I see now, it could be read both ways.