[Macha]

I mean, I'd be for Germany reactivating some of the nuclear power plants they shut down in the panic after Fukushima. But the lead time on a nuclear plant is long and wind/solar have reached the point where they can be rolled out at similar quantities much quicker and cheaper.

It was a mistake not to go nuclear to get rid of fossil fuel plants 20 years ago. The window for new installations is closing rapidly as renewables improve however.

[kergonath]

Nuclear, solar, and hydro all have different production profile, different strengths and weaknesses. They are all complementary, and we're not going anywhere if we don't use all the means at our disposal.

Nuclear definitely has a long lead time (and requires huge initial capital), but it should be built nevertheless, as it is much more efficient than the alternative for base load production. It has also very good synergies with hydrogen production.

[reedjosh]

Nuclear plants produce stable energy unlike solar and wind, and can also be used for desalination. There are a number of benefits to nuclear that make it desirable beyond what solar and wind can do.

That said, in an effort to become more self sufficient I too will be installing solar panels in the near future.