Do you mean only global ones? For country or Europe-focused ones, I showed two projections for Germany in an earlier thread not like that, and there are others.
Nuclear won't be enough because we can't build it fast enough.
The question is, where? The thing is that the rapid demand growth (even without efforts of demand reduction in the West) comes primarily from the Third World, while (renewables) development happens primarily in the First World. If the whole EU adopts a France-like production structure, that won't lead to a renewables mega-boom in place of coal in Asia. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
And wind, f I understand things correctly, has a similar financial structure to nuclear: high capital costs and low operating costs. Nuclear has a more expensive decommissioning. But, in addition, Nuclear power plants have higher decommisioning costs and take longer to put in place than wind farms. So I don't know why China couldn't be building wind farms to replace coal-fired plants. But right now they're building, not replacing, coal plants. Can the last politician to go out the revolving door please turn the lights off?
When all power sources are put on a rational playing field (not a level one, that doesn't exist), I am sure some wind sites will produce power cheaper than nuclear will, and that most hydro sites will.
And then we should exploit those better sites, and no others. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
