I don't think so. Here in France, we have our share of troubles. 27 of our 56 nuclear plants are offline and we were asked to reduce heating and electric consum

I don't think so. Here in France, we have our share of troubles. 27 of our 56 nuclear plants are offline and we were asked to reduce heating and electric consumption earlier this week to avoid power cut and keep the grid on. We have lots of difficulties keeping our plants on, due to badly designed and/or maintained plants, and this won't improve with global warming (e.g warmer river and sea in hot summer will make reactors more difficult to cool). Our failure to build our EPR in time and within budget is not reassuring either (from EUR 3.3 to 19.1 billion! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_Nuclear_Power_Plan...) I'd much prefer than we switch to solar and wind as fast as possible and as nuclear energy becomes less needed, we retire the big, old plant as safely and cheaply as possible (mmh). Of course, we'd better focus on retiring the most polluting plants first (coal ones in Central / East Europe) but the faster the transition, the better.