Ever since Germany’s announcement that it will go coal-free by 2022, one question keeps popping up in my head: Will mighty Germany be the first developed economy to commit energy suicide?

Earlier this year, Germany announced that it will close all of its 84 coal-fired power plants by 2038. Ronald Pofalla, chairman of the government commission that developed the plan, remarked “There won’t be any more coal-burning plants in Germany by 2038”.

But are Germany’s aspirations practically achievable?

In 2018, coal accounted for 35 percent of the electricity generated, while wind and solar together accounted for 25 percent. Nuclear and natural gas accounted for 12 and 13 percent respectively.

The potential of these resources to provide electricity in the future depends on various factors, including their proportion in the energy mix and the inherent energy-generating capabilities of each energy source.

Coal, despite the decision to abandon it, is the most reliable and affordable. Coal-fired plants provide stable output and are the number one electricity source for households and industries across the globe.

Natural gas’s rise to the top in the past decade has changed the energy sector globally. It now is viewed as a stable and abundant energy source, extracted, used, and even exported worldwide.

If Germany’s aversion to nuclear power continues, the nation will miss out on one of the fastest developing energy sources in the world. Nuclear energy is highly reliable and efficient. France gets 75 percent of its energy from nuclear, a testament to its wonders. Other top energy-consuming countries like Canada (15 percent), Russia (21 percent), India and China (2 and 3 percent, respectively, but both growing rapidly), and the United States (20 percent) also embrace it.

Germany now opposes both nuclear and fossil fuels and plans to have 100 percent renewable electricity. But unlike coal, nuclear, and natural gas-powered plants, both wind and solar are intermittent and thus unreliable. The wind doesn’t always blow, and the sun doesn’t always shine.

Some argue that batteries could be used for backup power during calm, sunless times, but such a high degree of evolution in battery capacity and functionality isn’t happening in the foreseeable future. As of date, no backup power can support a 100 percent renewable network.

This means Germany will have to contend with uncertainties in power supply on an everyday basis. Its electricity supply will become plagued by brownouts and blackouts—common in developing countries, but not in developed ones.

Currently, countries that feed a significant percentage of wind- and solar-generated electricity into their grids cope with their intermittency by linking it with electricity from coal, gas, or nuclear. In all likelihood, without those, which means relying on 100 percent renewables, Germany will face frequent blackouts.

In other words, Germany’s energy policy decisions amount to energy suicide.

If they are to avoid that outcome, the German people can only hope the country’s energy policy will change with changing political landscapes. If the political parties don’t usher in a change, the people might force the change, as Australians did in mid-May, when anti-coal parties lost heavily in elections.

Once decommissioned, coal plants can’t be made operational again cheaply or easily. In such a case, Germany will be left with no option but to import fossil fuel based energy resources from other nations, as it already plans to do.

Germany’s rejection of fossil fuels and embrace of wind and solar comes in the name of climate action. The country aims to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. Yet despite all its efforts, the country will still miss its emission reduction targets. So, essentially, although the German government justifies its plans as providing environmental benefits, the renewable transition will provide none. Typical of suicide, nobody gains.