I do think nuclear energy is part of the picture, but it is not immediate. TerraPower is working on a reactor in Wyoming that will be ready in 7 years at a cost

I do think nuclear energy is part of the picture, but it is not immediate. TerraPower is working on a reactor in Wyoming that will be ready in 7 years at a cost of $1B, which is considered quick and cheap for the industry[1][2]. Based on everything I've read, I think we need to do a bunch of different things all at once to address global warming and reduce emissions as quickly as possible. Yes, solar and wind are intermittent sources, but they're cheap and available now. Yes, we need to upgrade our grids to be able to handle all of the new electric vehicles. We also need to change over building heating/cooling. Find better means of making concrete. You may not have meant only do nuclear, but I see politicians saying "nuclear & carbon capture" as if that's going to get the job done, but I haven't seen any analysis that supports those things alone doing the job. [1] https://www.dw.com/en/scientists-pour-cold-water-on-bill-gates-nuclear-plans/a-59751405 https://www.dw.com/en/scientists-pour-cold-water-on-bill-gat... [2] https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/nuclear/bill-gates-funded-nuclear-startup-will-transform-a-wyoming-coal-plant https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/nuclear/bill-gates-fund...