Building more. Minimising human impact on the Earth shouldn't be about profit, that's what government funding should be for.

As an aside, if the industry was allowed to grow and mature properly they'd be cheaper to build these days.

Going the wrong way at the end there... Sigh

Nope. We literally do not have the resources/and or supply chain solely rely on alternatives for everything.

And I don't suggest nuclear to the exclusion of all else.

But battery tech that is barely out of research phase, small scale trials, or requires significant increase in supply capacity is still decades away from being a force in the industry.

What part of we are out of time do some people not understand.

And we'll need those too. Though we'll also need to bring on new mining capacity though which can take decades.

>we're pretty good at improving things when allowed to do so

We are. So why is fission not allowed to along side. People raise cost issues and overruns but that's a symptom of when you don't let an industry develop and a self-sustaining skilled workforce grow.

My point isn't too be pro-nuclear to the exclusion of all else. It's that it needs to be part of the make up because we are going to need resources spread around a lot of different industries.

Yes because cars run well on pumped hydro...

Problem is there literally isn't enough global reserves of required resources for grid storage and electrifying the global transport fleet.

And we can't just pin out hat on new discoveries, tech or advances that could take a decade or more to reach market, because we are out of time now.