Subject: Re: How Europe wrecked itself
Exactly. Because they never switched their economy over to unreliable sources of power.

In that they never switched from Russian energy, I agree. They didn't do anything. Though it isn't entirely reliable given that Russia is in a war, and pipelines and tankers are vulnerable.

As noted in more reliable articles (WSJ is a Murdoch rag), Europe's unemployment is low (and declining further), and their economy is growing ("modestly", as quoted in the more reliable articles). Your (WSJ) number is a tad low, but I won't quibble a decimal point (1.4%). "It sucks" is subjective. A "robust labour market" is a good thing. I doubt anything would be robust if the energy situation was as dire as the WSJ paints it.

And Russia is NOT a red herring. The EU was importing lots of Russian energy prior to 2022. The "greenies" were not getting their way. After 2022, the EU made a concerted effort to get off of Russian energy. It's quite well documented if you care to look for yourself. There are associated costs with that, and it was ahead of when the EU really wanted to do it. They had a phased plan, but that mostly went out the window when Putin attacked Ukraine.

Changing any infrastructure is going to be expensive. It was expensive to build pipelines and refineries when we did it. It will be expensive to build solar and wind and nuclear installations. China is being smart about it, planning for the future. It's costing them now, but they will have the power they need while other nations are scrambling to satisfy demand because fossil fuels are too expensive, or too hard to get, or both. Phasing renewables in now, before we desperately need it, is smart.

Nuclear is "green energy". A former head of Greenpeace even said so. Once a plant is built, there are zero emissions for decades. Germany's decisions were based on a valid concern about handling nuclear waste, the fear of a Chernobyl event (which couldn't happen in a water-moderated reactor, but most people don't know that), and a general anti-nuke sentiment (brought on by a couple of generations living under the fear of nuclear annihilation during the Cold War). And probably some other stuff I don't know about. I think it was a mistake, but I'm also certain the Green Party didn't make those decisions (a quick check shows they only got 12% of the vote, which is not enough to set policy).