[RedDevil]

Originally Posted by sendler

Everyone just skipped over my post so I will state it again: Sweden gets 50% of it's electricity from nuclear, 50% from hydro.
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electr...ctor_in_Sweden
.
Norway is 95% hydro.
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electr...ctor_in_Norway
.
Finland is 25% nuclear, 17% hydro, 24% import 5.6% wind, 1.9% other
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electr...tor_in_Finland
.
Brazil is 88% hydro.
.
Quebec is 90% hydro.
.
Ontario is nuclear 63% hydro 26%.
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electr...Canada#Ontario
.
France is nuclear 76% hydro 10%
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electr...ctor_in_France
.

If you are blessed with world class hydro, you can make effective electricity. If not, and you don't want to burn carbon fuels we should have kept working on the development of molten fuel reactors.

Definitely.

Another important point is efficiency.
CO2 does not equal well being.
Even plentiful energy does not equal well being. Only fulfilling the needs counts. Spillage, inefficiency, wastefulness are detrimental.

I dare even say that I 'm working on the efficiency of my means of transportation

In most places energy savings reduce carbon emissions by their full amount, as carbon fills in what nuclear and renewables don't cover.