That book was a helpful contribution to the debate when it was published in 2008, but by 2017 people were already pointing out[0] its obsolete assumptions about renewables, and there is now an open source collaborative effort to produce a more accurate and up-to-date version.[1]

I don't want to speak ill of the late great David MacKay, but it does seem that reality has exposed his pro-nuclear bias, which was already apparent[2] just from the choice of language he used when describing the different technologies.

[0] https://www.carboncommentary.com/blog/2017/3/30/l6qcqgoedse1...

[1] https://climate.lifeitself.us/without-hot-air/#why-this-proj...

[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/environment/comments/d1rwe/david_ma...

btw. china will double their wind power since 2019 at the end of the year. they build the biggest hydro plant on the planet and will add a ton of new pv panels in 2022 (even more than the previous years).

china is just not stupid and will focus on a single technology. what they do with nuclear is probably less than 25% than what they will build with solar and wind, besides that they plan to build over 30 plants, which would probably end in a desaster in the eu or us.

Much less than 25%. The nuclear industry in China is about the minimal investment while still keeping the door open, if some incredible breakthrough magically appears.

https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/average-annua...