&quot;1. This is excellent. It means we&#x27;re well on our way to sustainable energy generation. Wind and solar are only going to get cheaper. Even without subsidies, there is no reason to ever build another coal or oil fired generation facility. Natural gas will stick around until utility scale batteries ramp up, to where peaking plants are too expensive compared to utility scale batteries.&quot;<p>Wind&#x2F;solar + batteries will never cover everything, because statistically there will be an event that the (very finite) capacity can&#x27;t meet - then people will die, either freezing or overheating.<p>&quot;2. Nuclear is dead. Very dead. Thorium. Fast breeder. Pebble bed. I don&#x27;t care which you pick, no one is going to pour 10 years and $1-4 billion into a plant that won&#x27;t be cost competitive when it turns up (maybe some governments, but you can&#x27;t fix that; it&#x27;ll just get mothballed).&quot;<p>You&#x27;re very wrong here. China in particular is investing heavily in nuclear going forward, including thorium. There are a number of companies here in the US, such as Flibe Energy and Thorcon that are working hard on next-gen nuclear solutions.<p>Nuclear is actually more environmentally friendly than wind, as it doesn&#x27;t decimate bird and bat populations, has a much smaller land use footprint, and doesn&#x27;t cause widespread noise pollution. It also has the additional attributes of reliability and low cost. The inherently safe next-gen nuclear technologies will come in at less than 5 cents per KWH, perhaps as low as half that.<p>On a level playing field, wind in particular can&#x27;t compete. Eventually solar may, given enough technological breakthroughs.