What if … ?

What if the nuclear exit was not motivated by a muted fear of this technology and by the execration of its centralization (small local units, submarine type engines have not been developed; it had to be big, even without the need to enrich fissile material for military purposes)?

What if the fear of hypothetical catastrophic consequences of global warming was unfounded and not skillfully manipulated?

What if alternative sources of energy would contribute only futilely to slowing global warming because it is caused for only a small part by carbon dioxide emissions?

What if so-called “greentechs” were not so green as they require excessive investments while having lower availability as compared to current standards?

What if progress did not consist in eliminating well-established solutions to replace them by others that are more unpredictable, providing at last exactly the same service – electrical power at 220 / 380V and 50Hz – but with investments and operating costs dramatically higher than the current ones?

What if we would stop thinking that essentially inefficient technologies become profitable with a lot of subsidies and other corrupting mechanisms?

What if we reckon the crucial role that energy production and consumption play in the social and economic development of all countries, both affluent and poor?

What if today’s prosperity had no lifetime warranty?

Well then …
… we would get closer to wisdom and reason.
… we should stop a rambling energy policy that has no sensible goal.

If it hurts to have to acknowledge mistakes, it hurts even more to wait to change course.