I was talking specifically about Finland. Our situation is such that our energy consumption peaks during the winter months when onshore wind farms perform poorly.

You can see that the total share of renewables has climbed significantly, but production is heavily weighted on summer months when there is no shortage of electricity. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/nuclear-renewables-electr...

These numbers are all insignificant, tho. Finland needs to build roughly 22-35GW of renewable/nuclear power to get rid of carbon based energy, and we're nowhere near.

The clear answer is that we need both wind and nuclear – a LOT of both, but I doubt we'll do neither in sufficient quantity.

> I was talking specifically about Finland

Understood, thank you!

More minor points:

> You'd need to build 1300+ 3MW wind turbines

Modern offshore ones develop 12MW, and their load factor peaks at .6

> We had this "too slow to build" -argument 15 years ago, but no other renewables have delivered.

Nuclear isn't a renewable source.