[mbivert]

> Environmentalists were successful in opposing nuclear construction because it was expensive and unprofitable

As far as Europe is concerned, there seems to have been various political move and lobbying to affect energy independence (e.g. France): economy is transformed energy, so by nuking (…) energy independence, you're suffocating countries. The military role of nuclear is furthermore crucial; civil & nuclear must be correlated.

That's to say, giving up nuclear is not something a sane, well-driven country should do lightly, regardless of ideologies.

It's a tricky topic; what I regularly hear from economists is that wind & solar are still far from being able to compete with nuclear. And because of the previous two points, people can't but frown upon "green" arguments, even if the underlying intentions are honest and well-intended.

(China may not have misguided greenies, but it has a strong incentive to sell whatever it's offering).

[bobthepanda]

If China had a super cheap nuclear design they would be very happy to export that the same way they export their other technologies like EVs, high speed trains, solar panels, batteries, etc. But it simply does not exist.

[JumpCrisscross]

> If China had a super cheap nuclear design they would be very happy to export that

China "plans to export nuclear power reactors in the future" [1]. It's early stages, but being done through Belt & Road [2].

[1] https://www.iaea.org/bulletin/how-china-has-become-the-world...

[2] https://www.cipe.org/resources/chinas-nuclear-dragon-goes-ab...

[bobthepanda]

The first article refers to 2018 in the future tense, and the second article is three years old without a single announcement of a Belt and Road nuclear plant since then.

[Moldoteck]

china has a super cheap design called hualong and they plan to export it the way russia is exporting their designs. Another plan is finishing local adaptations of ap1000 that can be reselled without licensing problems