Renewables is an option for elfs from the treetops of Lothlorien or Ewoks. We, people of Earth, consider this  investement  a black hole, suitable for certain regions, but unpromising for the globalized world. We're entering very short (by standars of human history) period of gas that will be replaced by nucelar energy (what else?), of course there's still a question what we gonna combust in our engines, but this has multiple answers by now even though untested globally. Off the top of my head, 40% of world urainum ore comes form North Kazakhstan, while 40% of ore enrichment capacities are in Russia. *laughs evily* Spice must flow.

Speaking about the prospects of the US gas exports:
http://ourfiniteworld.com/2014/03/31/the-absurdity-of-us-natural-gas-exports/

That seems to be an underlying message directed towards the EU from the US officials when they say "wean itself from Russian gas", but as I've suspected it all along it's just words to influence public opinion, hoping someone will bite. The'd have more weight if the US could actually somehow undermine EU's energy stability. But again the idea of US gas exports to Europe is undermining by itself, since it's rather ephemeral.

Hah! I am bloody damn well glad we arent. I dont trust nuclear power, the way it can relatively easily be turned into nuclear weapons and the hazards of its waste. Besides we do pretty well with renewal - why are EU countries having trouble focussing on this?

Thorium based nuclear power pretty much negates both of those concerns.

Rather nuclear than this


Digging up half of Alberta for oil sands, which not only takes the boreal forest away but also produces a shit load of CO2 and pollutes the water table.
Ofcourse since few cars run on electricity, the oil sands will still all be dug up.

We can't and shouldn't rely on nuclear only, that makes no damn sense. Nuclear is a key option of the future but if we rely on it, then we are idiots. Look at consequences of Fukushima on Japan, it crippled it's economy even more since it accounts for 1/3 of their energy, even now and for a long time (the environmental impacts are huge too). And your country should know better, the Chernobyl disasters made the place uninhabitable for humans for a very long time. I'm unsure if nuclear technology is that much safer nearly 30 years later.

And whether you like it or not, renewable energy must be developed and put into place quickly. The disaster from failing to do this before conventional energy becomes cripplingly expensive will be very damaging to the global economy, it is quite a scary prospect. The point of pushing forward with renewable energy is to allow for countries to become self-sufficient (how is that a bad thing?) and so countries like yours can no longer push their weight around.   

How is this not a crime of some kind? 

I sense that radiophobia runs strong in you, young padawan. Chernobyl et el is not an excuse for passing on oportunity to develop more eco-friendly tech for energy production, it's a reason to ramp up security measures. Would have TEPCO learned a lesson from Chernobyl, Fukushima might have done far less damage than it did. Yes, we won't rely solely on nuclear energy, but that's goes without saying, as if now we're relying solely on hydrocarbonates.

Besides the biggest portion of renewables is hydro, and it's not exactly eco-friendly, plus hardly a universal solution.

That's Interesting, prices over here were surprisingly stable and low during the last months.

Even though "low" is relative, considering that over here, "low" means 233% of the 4 dollars that you pay...

It's not a good solution to energy shortages if there's any chance of making a place unhabitable. Defeats the point really. 

As for renewable, most weather elements can be taken advantage of if the means to do so occurred. Wind, sun, waves, water. And it may not be good enough to be a universal solution yet but it should be good enough with time.

Not only that but we need to make ways of getting energy more efficient, it's just far too wasteful right now