It's a very good and important question.
To become your strange uncle again, I'll say that in the war, Mackenzie King famously had this line in the conscription referendum: “Not necessarily conscription, but conscription if necessary.” That's kind of how I feel about nuclear: Nuclear if necessary, but not necessarily nuclear.
I will make the observation that we've seen a fixation, I think, on tech solutions like small nuclear, carbon capture and storage, and hydrogen. There's a small role to be played by hydrogen and carbon capture and storage in sectors that cannot be easily electrified. There is this odd tendency too often on display these days to fixate on these unproven technologies, when the non-sexy, yet cheaper and effective solutions are already there, sitting on the shelf and waiting for us to invest in them big time. I'm talking about solar, wind and geothermal. We know how to do these things.
The next few years are all about speed and scale, and these alternatives lend themselves to that.