My language was imprecise so let me change it to amazingly cheap if it will help advance the conversation.

I was thinking specifically about the EROI of nuclear generated electricity. It is actually staggering. I know it doesn't scale up and down with demand and we would still most likely use natural gas generated electricity to fill in the gaps during peak usage. That or just power down all the ASICS!!

It is my understanding that over the life cycle ICE are less energy intensive than electric batteries and it is more or less destined to stay that way so I don't see us moving away from fossil fuels. Also, there seems to be no alternative for the chemicals/fertilizer and other uses. So, I'm in no way suggesting we start to meaningfully move away from fossil fuels.

To return to my point in the original reply, I am hoping Canada can make smart decisions with respect to generating nuclear power—a technology we are a actually a leader in—that gives us a huge competitive advantage against economies that don't turn to this technology. If that is the case, our decline relative to the alternative scenario where we do not fully embrace it may be much less dramatic.

Hopefully that makes my perspective more clear for at least some people.