[childintime]

The word is solar. Instant reduction in CO2 emissions, won't be a decade late, and won't be obsolete by the time it's finally ready. Nuclear is a politician's vanity project. And politicians do have a knack for choosing the wrong thing at the wrong time, by ignoring the market. Just let the engineers make the call.

[alwa]

I think the engineers tend to say nuclear makes much more sense than solar for baseload right? That, and “most of the cost and delay is in these obscenely overcautious regulations?”

[otherme123]

As of today, batteries are on par with nuclear cost. And falling.

As for the "obscenely regulations", I had read this before, but nobody can tell me what are they referring to. Because not to long ago France had a massive problem of corrosion in half their nuclear plants, and currently is having a second one (https://balkangreenenergynews.com/french-power-prices-jump-a...). It seems that "obscenely overcautious regulations" still not enough to catch leaks on time, defects that now threat with a energy crisis in France (and secondarily in Europe).

[uecker]

Not really, there a lot of factors making nuclear expensive apart from regulations. And is also clear that you need some regulations.

[mmooss]

> Nuclear is a politician's vanity project. And politicians do have a knack for choosing the wrong thing at the wrong time, by ignoring the market.

Nuclear benefits the politicians' vested supporters, major corporations. Renewables are smaller and not vested interests.

> Just let the engineers make the call.

That dangerously assumes that engineers don't have their own biases and corruption. It's hard to fathom that perspective given what everyone can see happening in Silicon Valley for years.