Neither solar nor wind get you there quickly, but over the long haul they make sense. And if one were to include the cost of sequestering the CO2 from coal or natural gas the answer would be obvious (since nobody is required to pay cradle-to-grave cost for removing hundreds of millions of years worth of carbon deposits from the Earth and putting that into the atmosphere in the form of CO2.) If we in the U.S. ever start paying for carbon sequestration, gas will be in the price range that Europeans are paying, or greater. Won't effect me as much since I'm getting 50+ mpg in the family hauler.
As for closed hydro, I'm of mixed opinion on that. It won't do what we need it to long term, and it ruins rivers and valleys as well as killing ecosystems. I like to kayak, canoe, fish, hike, and camp so I would prefer not to have every bit of flowing water treated as a dammable (damnable?) resource.
The problem with fission is not unlike that of CO2 and fossil fuel: the U.S. is unwilling to deal with the backend of the problem (cradle to grave.) How many of those FUBAR GE Mk I reactors have we in the U.S. shut down since Fukushima? None! And they are inherently unsafe designs! Any event that shuts off pump water to them for a few minutes will result in a meltdown just like Japan...or worse. It is straightforward physics of the reaction, normal isotopic composition of fuel rods in service for awhile, and heat transfer rates vs. physical properties/chemical reactions (melt properties and oxidizing the fuel rods.) Now I could design a passive/natural circulation system that could handle the load on a new reactor design, but that isn't going to happen because it is EXPENSIVE and BIG and would still be subject to new failure modes...some not unrelated to the seismic event that happened in Japan.
New nuke fission plants aren't going to happen because the installed cost per kwh will exceed new solar and wind. And in the meantime, our local municipal electric use has been declining each year despite an increase in population...perhaps not unsurpising since folks like myself have cut annual electricity use by 60% compared to the previous occupants. (Ditto for water use, and about a 30+% reduction in nat. gas.) And I haven't changed my lifestyle to do it.
Efficiency improvement is where the real change is needed. Obama has been slow in this regard too. There is a lot that could be done in improving basement insulation for example. Or how about dryer efficiency standards/tiers? Or ovens? Or set top cable boxes? How about drainwater heat recovery? Requiring insulation of hot water lines? Insulating tub/jacuzzi walls.
Wish my house and every other in the neighborhood had solar cells on the roof. Can't see that it would be much different than having shingles or windows up there. Shingles aren't exactly works of art...