...changed.
Chancellor Schultz would have done well to have read it before choosing to kill people since it has been available for reading for years.
There is actually tons of scientific literature on the subject of the external cost of energy; I simply chose that one because it has a nice table.
Before Schultz decided to kill people by insisting on closing Germany's last three nuclear plants, prominent scientists begged him to show some decency and not increase the numbers of people killed by coal. I wrote about it here:
The scientists can screw off: Germany shuts its last nuclear reactors.
Over in the E&E forum, we have fossil fuel sales people and sales bots rebranding fossil fuels (at a thermodynamic loss) as "hydrogen," ( A Giant Climate Lie: When they're selling hydrogen, what they're really selling is fossil fuels.) praising and cheering this disgusting policy of driving climate change, specifically appealing to this unapologetic embrace of fossil fuels by the Chancellor of Germany:
Why investing in new nuclear plants is bad for the climate.
The author of this appalling pitch for fossil fuels, cited this ignorant lawyer, Schultz, as if he were a scientist, although Shultz's contempt for science, as evidenced by his energy policies, is as clear as daylight would be, were the skies not filled with smoke because planet is on fire because of policies like Shultz's.
To me, climate is actually the only issue at this point that really matters. Shultz is on the wrong side, and refuses to open his mind, suggesting to me that he has a limited mind.
I note, with disgust, that German energy policies which Schultz assumed unchanged from those of his predecessors (originating with the Gazprom executive and former Germany Chancellor Gerhard Schröder) funded Putin's Ukraine war.
I have no use for Schultz, none.
= new reply since forum marked as read