Thanks for your comment Paul.You're right that taking nuclear off the table makes the challenge of getting to a low-carbon energy mix that much more difficult. And you may well be right that China will capture the value of the future nuclear industry as companies and governments in North America and Europe continue to drag their feet.
That said, I wouldn't write off wind w/ gas backup so quickly: prices are coming down while capacity factors and turbine size (especially offshore) continue increasing. Intermittency will continue to be a problem, but one that better storage and grid mgmt will help mitigate.
The larger point, I think, is that no one energy source will ever power the planet. The last time we had just one energy source was before the industrial revolution, when we relied almost entirely on biomass for local, small-scale energy needs. We'll continue to have an energy mix going forward, as we have since coal began eating market share from biomass in the 18th century. The question is what this energy mix will look like and how quickly it will transition away from coal, oil, and gas and towards lower-carbon alternatives. As I mention in the article, much hinges on policy and investment decisions.
Finally, I don't think you have to be a policy expert or scientist to have thoughts on energy. Given that our energy use impacts everyone in the world, my view is that everyone is entitled to have views on the topic. Thanks for sharing yours!