Agree, great post. The additional point that needs to be made is...

Agree, great post. The additional point that needs to be made is that decisions on how to provide energy for growing demand have a roughly fifty year investment horizon. The longer the world chooses coal and/or pretends renewables can do the job, the bigger the problem i.e. decisions made now to do nothing or to lock in coal, will have an exponential cost impacts over fifty years in terms of the environment and economically.

The reality is that decisions need to be made now to go to nuclear as the mainstay of the power industry while awaiting the next generation technologies. This will create the certainty about environmental stability and, in turn, investment in sustainability in this and future centuries. The world will see huge change in the very near future - nuclear provides the bridge, any other vision is just simply short of the mark - something 9 billion people cannot afford to risk.

Accordingly, the sentiment amongst world govts will change (it has already in China, India, Russia, I could go on) - and it will progress rapidly - unfortunately our blinkered government will likely be the last to move, ironic given that we are the world's biggest polluters per capita.