i just don’t think this is a valuable question to ask

But well, it kind of is! When looking at energy systems, each type of plant you put into the system has (often counterintuitive) consequences on the rest of the system. And this is especially true for nuclear power. That is why it IS important to get an idea of how much nuclear energy you want to have in your energy mix, because only then you can determine if your energy system is even sustainable.

Therefore, my question stands unchanged. Or maybe we can make it a little broader: How do you think that the energy system would need to look like?

I’m content to stick by my layman position that anything that gets us away from pouring greenhouse gases into the atmosphere is better in the short term.

And I fully agree with you on that. I just want to discuss with you if nuclear is really the solution you think it is. (Because it probably isn't.)

We already have the knowledge and infrastructure to do so way faster by using nuclear as a leg up

Are you aware of how little nuclear power there is currently in the energy-mix, what time it takes to build new ones and how much (usable) uranium exists on the planet? (I can tell you if you don't want to look it up - just ask.) Because you might have wrong expectations of the technical potential of this energy source.