Think about what we could do with nuclear power if we had spent decades designing and building cheaper reactors. Small Modular Reactors out of a factory could solve the biggest problem of nuclear, that it's expensive and takes a long time to build.
We already have small modular energy producing units called photovoltaic cells. They can be installed anywhere with sun by anyone who knows how to use a screwdriver, don’t explode, and don’t contain a highly regulated material.
In other words, even if we grant that nuclear is a good idea in the U.S. is it also a good idea in Mexico? What about Guatemala?
You missed the part where your “small modular energy producing unit” only works during the day and when it doesn't rain though.
That's true you cannot spread nuclear everywhere in the world due to political instability constraints. But at the same time, the majority of CO2 emissions come from countries which have access to nuclear technology already…
The US government has already spent massive amounts of money subsidizing nuclear science programs, because much of the technology is dual-use for weapons. The same is true of every nuclear armed nation in the world.
We subsidized the nuclear power industry for many decades. We also perversely spent $trillions subsidizing the fossil fuel industry.
What the author and others point out is solar lacked those massive subsidies. Had we spent the same amount on subsidies for solar power, as we spent on nuclear or fossil fuels, solar power technology would have advanced much faster.
Yeah, maybe if we dumped even more cash in to nuclear, we might have those cost efficient reactors people keep dreaming about. Or maybe not, because there are compelling arguments that nuclear power will never be able to compete against solar on price. Yes, I am aware that the sun isn't always shining...
