The only way to survive is massive wind, solar, storage, and transmission.
France could have led the way, but when they started building Flamanville last decade, they discovered that they nuclear doesn't really fit modern economies that well.
And with half their reactors offline for extended repairs right now, France has been a big part of Europe's energy crunch.
Macron has only proposed up to 14 new reactors, and there's no way they will come online before 2040.
Nuclear is a solution from the past, we need to build for the future.
https://balkangreenenergynews.com/hungary-to-build-paks-ii-n...
Ironically, Russian reactors would reduce dependence on Russian gas. That kindof hurts my brain.
That leaves China and South Korea as the only groups left with know how. And China is probably out for similar reasons. South Korea has had a few corruption issues but maybe they have fixed those.
I still have questions about whether advanced economies should be generating power from giant, complex construction projects when their manufacturing productivity is so massively dominant over construction prductivity. But I would love to be proven wrong about advanced economies' ability to build nuclear economically.
South Korea just singed a deal with Russia. They are going to build nuclear plant for Egypt: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20220828-russia-south-kore...
https://twitter.com/DolanGeraldine/status/156439235330088960...
Their choices are to start building reactors now, suck it up and remove sanctions against Russian energy or massive de-industrialization and back to the dark ages.