Ok, I did not expect a personalized list :-)

Desertec and Alpha Ventus: Of course I could try to analyse the information that is available online, but what would be really interesting is talking to the leading scientists. But: Those people talk to collegues or journalists only, and the latter don't write about scientific aspects, either because they don't understand them themselves or because they have to assume that most of their readers don't. So I don't know how I could get to the really interesting parts of the story...

Nuclear power: There is a long political story about who decided and planned what and how people reacted to it. There isn't much science to it, at least not as far as I know. BTW I once glanced into a reactor core at the institute Laue-Langevin in Grenoble, and it glowed blue, not green.

Climate modelling: I did not get far enough to write anything interesting, the main observation of mine is that there is a dangerous gap between how people in climate modelling manage their software and how this would be done by software engineers...

Overall I'm not convinced that I could write anything of interest...

Technical question: Would I email you the test or would I post it myself and is there a chance to get a preview and check the post?