Construction costs are currently skyrocketing

Almost every war is ended at the negotiating table. Do you have better solutions? Do you really think Ukraine can win militarily? Do you really think the sanctions are effective? Should NATO attack Russia and escalate the war?

What would be a solution for you that could be achieved at the negotiating table? Ukraine cedes half of its territories and is demilitarized? What other proposal would Russia accept?

And then the big question: What comes next? Russia would have learned in that case that after attacking a country, it only needs to wage war against it for a limited time in order to gain territories at the negotiating table. How many attacks/wars should we then just watch?

The sanctions are taking effect and the war costs Russia a lot of money and resources that are lacking elsewhere. This will certainly hold for some time, but Russia will not be able to sustain it for years.

A differentiated discussion is always desirable, but what bothers me is

Russia is the aggressor and illegally invades a neighboring country. Cruel and unacceptable. But

Here you simply undermine every basis from the beginning. This "but" is simply unacceptable, relativizes the preceding clause, and exposes you as lacking empathy. How often I wish that people with these statements would sit on the front lines for a day and be attacked in order to understand what they are actually saying.

, by the way, that is the fitting analogy why a discussion about climate change with you is pointless; you deny it, so everything that came after was therefore futile.

...
Name one reason why it should be more sensible to transport an energy source like oil or gas over thousands of kilometers and then burn it with poor efficiency rather than producing the required amount of energy directly on site yourself.

Because it is cheaper for the emerging economies! And they are far from being satisfied. Quite simple. The high praise of renewable energies unfortunately falls on deaf ears there.

Because it is cheaper for the emerging economies! And they are by no means satisfied yet. Quite simple. Unfortunately, the high praise of renewable energies finds no audience there

How much longer is it actually still cheaper for these economies? The energy required to produce a photovoltaic module is recovered in our latitudes after 1 1/2 years, after that the system is in the positive and can theoretically be operated for 40 years or even longer, and that without significant follow-up costs. And that is exactly the reason why China has meanwhile installed seven times the capacity of renewable energy compared to Germany and this year alone will install again the complete capacity installed in Germany. So the high praise of renewable energies very much does find an audience there. In China, plants for power generation from renewable energies with a total nominal capacity of 1,000 gigawatts are now on the grid. That is about four times the total installed capacity for power generation in Germany including gas, nuclear, and coal. And you don't call that an audience?

I will build a UPS in front of my WP. With the threatening flickering power this winter, the investment is worth it to me.

...
And you don't call that hearing?

Unfortunately, yes. Because however brilliant your information may sound, you should mention the construction of new nuclear and coal power plants. And not just in China. How long fossil energies will remain cheaper I cannot tell you, I have no crystal ball. But it would be nice if we took the first step before the second. We need energy now to keep being in the front.