Oh you mean the Germany that had to turn to massive amounts of coal to keep up energy production in order to keep their people from starving because clean energy didn't pan out. Sounds like a great example especially when climate change is an existential threat to the entire human race.
[0] https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy_pie/chart.htm?l=en&...
[1] https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy_pie/chart.htm?l=en&...
The graph of Germany's energy mix over time doesnt quite tell the this story, however:
https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/p...
In fact it shows that nuclear power was never that relevant to Germany and that that loud hissy fit was about a change in < 5% of Germany's electricity mix. Why so controversial?
Well, the reason for this political shamefest are a bit murky - possibly military related - but one thing is certain: it had less than nothing to do with environmentalism. That was a cover.
The narrative that coal substituted for nuclear power is a very blatant lie, and motivated more by political/military concerns rather than any concern for the environment.
It’s not a lie. Germany has decommissioned 20 GW of nuclear power since 2010, according to the statistics you provided. Over 37 GW of coal power remains online. If Germany kept the nuclear plants online, they could have instead decommissioned an additional 20 GW of coal power. But they didn’t. Which means 20 out of the 37 GW of German coal power is directly substituting for nuclear power.