Sleepy,
This is only remote arctic, but you menton a very important point, may be worth its own thread here.
The reason, why Vattenfall is using german coal is, that this fossil fuel is highly subsidized by the german government and the taxpayers. If you read about german "Energiewende" the switch from nuclear and fossil to renewables, you will often read, that it is expensive due to high subsidizing costs and that energy costs have been rising for the consuments (not for companys, but this you won´t read in the press). You will never read or hear about how much fossil fuels are subsidized in Germany. You have to dive really deep into the internet to dig out the numbers.
Not only does Vattenfall (and others) get 100 Euro/ton coal only for burning this stuff (they do not need to produce electricity!), but they do not pay employer fees / social fees for the people working in the plants, they do not pay for restoring the landscape and so on and so on......
In reality subsidies for renewables are dwarfed by subsidies for fossil fuel, and this only because people are lazy and not willing to leave deep rooted traditions. The argument used by the government is employment in these areas where the coal plants are located, it is never mentioned that renewables would create many more employments than the few 1000 in german coal industry.
When you listen to your (mine) Prime minister Stefan Löfven you will realize that he is rather naive, not to say uncapable to think more complex.
