[MoonWalk]

Nobody said it would be as cheap as solar. But "renewables" can't fulfill ALL power needs ALL the time.

When you actually need to generate electricity rather than gather it, what's better than nuclear?

[jfengel]

Renewables don't need to fulfill everything all the time. If they need assistance from fossil fuels 10% of the time, that's a 90% cut in greenhouse gas emissions. The last 10% won't be the biggest issue to deal with.

So you can build expensive nuclear plants for that small fraction of the time, or you can continue to use existing fossil fuel plants for free. The difference to the carbon bottom line is small.

[Moldoteck]

"Renewables don't need to fulfill everything all the time. If they need assistance from fossil fuels 10% of the time, that's a 90% cut in greenhouse gas emissions. The last 10% won't be the biggest issue to deal with." - so funny seeing environmentalists accepting parallel gas infrastructure when countries like France/Sweden don't have it.

[sehansen]

France does have parallel gas infrastructure though. It's, funnily enough, at around 10% of their electricity supply.