> Renewables are based on the hope that one day we will either had transcontinental grids, which no one has managed to build, or get batteries with energy stora

> Renewables are based on the hope that one day we will either had transcontinental grids, which no one has managed to build, or get batteries with energy storage seen only in Star Trek. That's absolutely ridiculous. Even with nuclear power, we'll need to produce MASSIVE amounts of hydrogen to cut all carbon emissions. If we have enough renewable hydrogen production plants to make all the hydrogen we need for ships, planes, steel production, farming and fertilizers, we'll have all the energy regulation and storage capability we'll ever need. Seasonal variations in cold climates can be handled better by trash burning facilities. Yeah, recycle/reuse first, but eventually you'll need to get rid of a lot of non-recyclable mixed waste regardless. I feel like people claiming nuclear is essential has never truly thought about the big picture. In my opinion it's a benefit that renewables stimulate more R&D into energy storage. It's a positive synergy, since those solutions are absolutely essential to solving the climate crisis anyway. Unless we invent nuclear reactors we can put on planes and trucks. Now there's a Star Trek level invention!