Thats a chicken/egg peoblem. If enough renewables are build the storage follows. In a perfect world goverments would incentivice storage but in an imperfect one problems have to occure before somebody does something to solve them. Anyway, according to lazard renewables + storage are still cheaper than NPPs.
Slow, expensive, riddeled with corruption, long ago surpassed by renewables. Why should we use it?
Maybe you should read up on the topic and not just repeat baseless falsehoods.
That would be so nice...
Propagandist propagandizes.
More news at 11
Some critics argue that the prestige of the Prize in Economic Sciences derives in part from its association with the Nobel Prizes, an association that has often been a source of controversy. Among them is the Swedish human rights lawyer Peter Nobel, a great-grandnephew of Alfred Nobel.[40]
Nobel accuses the awarding institution of misusing his family's name, and states that no member of the Nobel family has ever had the intention of establishing a prize in economics.[41] He explained that "Nobel despised people who cared more about profits than society's well-being", saying that "There is nothing to indicate that he would have wanted such a prize", and that the association with the Nobel prizes is "a PR coup by economists to improve their reputation".[40]
No idea what you mean and not gonna read the ipcc report now.
Ok, bask in your american exceptionalism if you please.
Those data centers would soon be somewhere else due to... economics. And even if not, wouldn't be significant.
Maybe if you start heating your homes by burning car tires in your gardens. But otherwise, no. You are already so far behind the curve that economics really don't allow CO2 emission increases on a global significant level.
The world is not just the USA...
Yes, but energy density doesn't matter for most applications and the waste it produces is highly problematic.