Remundo wrote:(...) For me, talking about nuclear as a stakeholder in the energy transition is as stupid as talking about natural gas. These are exhaustible and polluting energies. On these 2 criteria, they are automatically disqualified.
"Nuclear" in its current form (fission) is effectively exhaustible. With the use of generation 4 and the use of thorium, that would probably leave us more than two centuries of reserves in front of us, or even more if we reuse our waste.
All this is more than enough to reach the end of the century and the mastery of thermonuclear fusion. Lithium reserves are in their turn exhaustible (about 1000 years of reserves), but here again this would be without counting the contributions of new physics. by the end of the century and the possibility of using available resources over very long periods (a-neutron fusion).
I don't think the argument of resource depletion is really solvable, the technique will always exceed its limits (which does not exclude periods of blackouts and / or slowdowns as will be the case for at least 50 years).
The only argument that holds the road is that of the amount of entropy that can be dissipated in nature and its ecological, social, economic and cultural impact ... except
this topic is never discussed.
I have the impression that many very sympathetic associations (like Negawatt) seem to ignore (intentionally or naively) the power of technology.
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.