I'm sorry, but your story is missing a vital component. How much space is required!
As a thought-experiment, let's imagine that technology switches and lifestyle changes manage to halve American energy consumption to 125 kWh per day per person. How big would the solar, wind and nuclear facilities need to be to supply this halved consumption? For simplicity, let's imagine getting one-third of the energy supply from each.
To supply 42 kWh per day per person from solar power requires roughly 80 square meters per person of solar panels.
To deliver 42 kWh per day per person from wind for everyone in the United States would require wind farms with a total area roughly equal to the area of California, a 200-fold increase in United States wind power.
To get 42 kWh per day per person from nuclear power would require 525 one-gigawatt nuclear power stations, a roughly five-fold increase over today's levels.http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/05/13/mackay.energy/index.html?imw=Y&iref=mpstoryemail
Please check your numbers again. If wind and solar were THAT cheap when compared to fossil fuels or nuclear, the free market would already have swung that way
And then there's the land required for:
mining of the uranium ore,
conversion to U3O8 (uranium oxide - yellowcake form),
conversion to uranium hexafluoride,
enrichment from 0.7% U235 to 2-5% U235,
conversion to uranium dioxide (UO2) pellets,
loading of the fellets into rods, then into fuel assemblies.
Then finally the reactor site... but wait, we're not finished...
then there's the waste processing facility
and finally the waste storage facility
Holy cow that's a lot of land!!! Screw that, I need about 20 square meters to provide enough power for me and about 300 of my closest neighbors. But like I said before (not that anyone listens), no one single solution is going to meet our needs now or anytime in the forseeable future.
PS - please name the last year that power was a free market. The market is going to stay where they have infastructure already in place. Alternative electricity sources are good for reducing or eliminating further fossil plant construction, but not to eliminate current fossil plants.