There are some tired old arguments being trotted out here. Nuclear, coal and gas power stations are reliable, large and produce 24/7.
Renewables are generally small and dependant on sun, water flow or wind.
By their nature they are erratic and therefore unreliable in output.
Further they cannot be relied on to provide base load or cope with surges. At present they can only supplement more traditional power stations.
    The western lifestyle has evolved as a hungry beast consuming ever more energy requiring ever more linkages in order to function. Take away power and modern civilisation collapses. That is a given-unpalatable though that may be.
    For our future wellbeing we need to curtail our energy usage. Burning fossil fuels for energy generation is putting ever more CO2 in the atmosphere. This can only aggravate the existing trends of increasing instability of climate. Our major feed grains require a distinct temperature regime to thrive in. As temperature increases the crop becomes stressed and yields drop(DRAMATICALLY) This takes no account of associated stresses such as drought. Therefore think starvation!
      So we are headed into a corner. Superficially nuclear offers a solution-however end of life cleanup costs are not only expensive but inadaquate. Also when things go wrong, they go horribly wrong. Think Chernobyl, Calder Hall, Fukushima etc. The nuclear option could maybe sort out the climate but potentially destroy swathes of the environment- definitely not good.
    And finally we have uncle sam butting heads with the bear. If that occurs bigtime the factors outlined above become a total irrelevance. Whither humanity in these circumstances is probably a dramatic thinning out(Think Georgia guidestones for numbers), a reduced standard of living, a loss of many of the toys of the technological toys that we have been used to and a very precarious future.
Not a happy thought!