Not going to happen. We need solutions rolled out at global scale by 2030. Nuclear power projects don't have a good track record for speed.
We need solutions that no-one is going to object to and for which the whole supply chain is already huge. Nuclear's cooling water demand alone makes it vulnerable to protest.
I'm hoping that Form's iron-air grid-scale battery is manufacturable, scalable and economical. Shouldn't be too hard to commit a few percent of the world's iron refining capacity to making grid-scale batteries to complement solar and wind power.
If not Form's, then one or more of their competitors' batteries. I sure hope someone cracks it. Last resort, we could use Lithium chemistries, but that wouldn't be so environmentally benign and would take a bit longer to scale out.
We could literally build those identical, 1960's style designs if we absolutely had to.
Of course, we'd build something a little more modern, even just a little more modern Canadian CANDU reactors would work.
We take forever to build them for organizational reasons, not because there's something that's inherently difficult that takes 30 years to do.
I wish.
> You do remember when France is 85% Nuclear and they built out their entire national infrastructure very quickly.
No, I don't remember it; I was a long way away and young. I still don't speak French.
Yes, it's a bit sad that we can no longer do what a bunch of French bureaucrats with their 30-hour work weeks and 8-week vacances could do in the 1970s--even when we're desperate.
We could literally copy their not-very-good designs if we had to.
Those plants are still effective and operational and provide a major economy with 85% (!!!) of their electricity.
They build them quickly and it's worked out fine.
Well, unless you’re talking about fusion, which, at this point, truly is a “magical” solution.
Yes, it’s called nuclear power