Norway has _really_ cheap electricity due to producing 90% of it via hydro, backed by being a gas and oil exporter with a total population smaller than Paris.
Really cheap electricity can be achieved with nuclear everywhere in the world.
Making the same errors we made in France are not a mandatory thing. What is happening right now is not because nuclear was the wrong choice, but because we stopped investing in it during decades and so we are now stuck with this corrosion issue everywhere because all our power plants aged in parallel and so, issues relative to aging happens in parallel.
It’s a sad state because this corrosion issue is said to be easily solvable … as long as you don’t have dozens of reactors to fix in parallel before the winter.
They supported it with natural resources, subsidies/tax cuts for EVs, and a good enough economy. All of which are either non existend, or declining in most of Europe.
And having a country with big sales is nowhere close to the same thing as supporting a 350 market with anywhere near replacement rates of its cars - which beside lacking infrastructure, it also needs capacities, battery resources etc, that are not there at this level.
Due to subsidies from selling oil. In a climate where lithium batteries will die way faster than a combustion engine would. It looks great on paper, as long as you don't look at the big picture.
Yeah, that's not happening. It wouldn't even happen without the whole energy hoopla going on today, even less so as it is now.
>What I'm saying is we're simply not ready at all.
This is one of those feel-good goals that get moved decade by decade. It's not meant to be taken seriously...
It will just help push some subsidies and sell some more EVs, but nothing will be 100% EV or even 50% EV in 2035.