I usually don't respond to ACs, but in this case it's too easy. Read the article for that. Also, who gets to choose the monarch? You?

This is just another teenage rebellion movement like Libertarianism. "Don't trust the old people. They're just trying to oppress you!" Yes, Libertarians, you are now the old guys who can't be trusted. :) As such you and your philosophies must be rebelled against much like you tore at the chains of your oppressor parents in the two party system.

None. The AP-1000 is the first new design to be approved by the NRC in 30 years. The agency is structured in such a way so nuclear will die a slow death in the United States. Probably the only option for long term new reactor designs is in China, and possibly the Czech Republic.

Yeah, 2030 is a realistic estimate for deployment.

We will need to scrap existing plants as they age out, but many of them can run for decades more. The best bet for newly built plants are the AP-1000 and their ilk.

I suggest you look into 4th generation designs, especially the modular ones which do not require pressure containment. They have a much smaller carbon footprint.

Nuclear reduces carbon. Why is it not an option?

Does increasing emissions cut the world any slack?

Sure there is something they can do.

Turn the reactors back on.

Why? Simple: Fear.

Yes, and the water has been raised 0.000001 degrees.

If we switch to molten salt based thorium we'll have thousands of years of fuel.

We're not there yet. Until we are efficiency is useful. Don't get me wrong, I think we should electrify everything, but you should always use the resources you have as efficiently as is prudent.

Your first response is nonsensical.

How many panels? How much resources? You ignore these questions because answering them destroys your platitudes.

How much physical resources would it take to build the panels necessary to harvest infinite energy? How much land area?

The only thing infinite in this situation is the stupidity required to believe that any resource is infinite.