Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1 Weaknesses of the current energy model and a view for the future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2 Nuclear energy, an obstacle for the full development of renewable energies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.1 Nuclear energy is not an option for the future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.2 The cost of nuclear energy and the problem of waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2.3 Eight arguments against the use of nuclear power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
3 Scenarios for a model based on 100% renewable energy in 2050 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
4 Ideas for petroleum-free transportation in 2050 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
5 Economic implications of the new model: more and improved jobs and international markets . . . . . . . . 125
6 Recommendations to public authorities and citizens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
6.1 Political recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
6.2 Citizens’ responsibility with regard to energy savings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
|