I agree that the situation here is unlikely to be a text book repetition of the 1930s. A lot of complexity and public policy measures.
Energy is a good call, in that you have pressure from climate change. Uranium is one possibility as plants are better designed...BUT there remain unresolved problems eg. how to secure the highly toxic waste we are leaving to future generations, and the fact that some places are intrinsically unsuited because of seismic problems eg. Japan, Indonesia. Building on fault lines is not terribly smart.
Algal biofuels is a possibility, but there are 2 problems: growing commercial quantities, and competition for food growing land. Some companies are working on maximising growth, and eliminating the land issue through efficiences. The obvious advantage of biofuels is you can site them next to a CO2 emitter and mop it up as growth feed for the algae. Win win, except you are recycling the Co2 rather than eliminating it entirely (a big ask). AEB is one mob that interests me in this area.
