Here's the part you left out, Charley:

"The government acknowledges that a fleet of flexible (and hydrogen-ready) natural gas plants will be necessary to run a stable power system."

With that statement, Germany is effectively admitting they will never decarbonize their electrical grid. Whether their gas plants are "hydrogen-ready", or not.

Versagen is German for failure.

I don't think anti-nuclear sentiment stems from what nuclear power actually is; it stems from the associations that have attached themselves to the idea of nuclear power in the minds of those opposing it. 

The associations that lead so many to oppose nuclear power are war, human arrogance, dominance of nature, and fear of being made a cog in a vast impersonal technological machine. It doesn't matter whether the associations have justification in fact; once they lodge in a mind, they create their own perceptual reality. People choose what to credit and what to discount based on their established biases. Humans are not rational creatures, they're rationalizing creatures. The need to align with one's peer group / community, or to justify a position previously taken, is extremely powerful.

The German population, in general, may be predisposed to succumb to anti-nuclear memes because of their cultural history. I lived in Germany for 18 months while I was serving in the US army. From what I saw, Germans generally view themselves as responsible stewards of the land and nature. They value art, craftsmanship, and social responsibility. The deep trauma they endured in the aftermath of World War II alienated many Germans from the triumphal visions of a new world of atomic power that were touted in the 1950s.

I'm old enough to have been around for the genesis of the anti-nuclear movement. It grew from the soil of radical environmentalism and rejection of the exuberantly pro-growth, materialist consumer society that was being built in the post-war years. I was a teen at that time, idealistic, and with a good deal of sympathy for environmental goals. But the movement was contaminated with dishonesty. The founders of the anti-nuclear movement weren't worried about nuclear accidents or inflated fears of the dangers of nuclear radiation. They were revolutionaries who worried that clean nuclear power would mask the fundamental awfulness of the industrial order they despised.

Early anti-nuclear radicals preferred that modern society be powered by coal -- the dirtier the better -- because they saw it as fitting. When people were choking on air they could barely breath, they would finally see the error of their ways. They would reject industrial civilization and return to a simple life in harmony with nature. It didn't work out that way of course. Instead we got the EPA, and cleaned up coal as much as we could. Everything except the CO2, which wasn't seen as a problem in those years.

It's interesting to reflect that the climate crisis that confronts us today is something that would never have happened, had the anti-nuclear movement not been so successful in stoking fear.