His points are mostly valid. But there is only one that matters. The price of natural gas.
I'm a realist that understands enough of the world to make real assessments on our industry. The licensing streamline was performed to open up the ABILITY to build new nuclear plants. The first few reactors build post COL are proof of concepts. A warning blow across the bows of the natural gas industry. -- To prime the pump, if needed.
When it costs less money to make electricity via nuclear power versus other options, we will make electricity via nuclear power. When it costs less money to make electricity via natural gas versus other options, we will make electricity via natural gas. That is what the market dictates. It's not magic. There is no mystery. It's not peoples love or hate for a method of power generation that dictates its use in the united states. It's simple economics.
The Nuclear Renaissance isn't over, its on pause.
Two biggest hurdles/liabiities for commercial nukes;
NIMBY - Northeast new construction? - not likely in my lifetime,...
Southeast? - Lots of potential,...
Southwest? - Texas yes, everybody else no,...
Upper Midwest? - not likely in my lifetime,...
Great Central Prarie? - not likely in my lifetime,...
Rockies - no
Pacific coast - no
Long Term Waste Storage - Without a long term central repository, or state by state long term repositories (my preference), liability of spent fuel/GTCC materials will be the ugly football that keeps getting kicked down the road from corporate fleets to corporate mergers to that notion in the back of everybodies head that high level waste liability is "too big to fail" and the government of the people will get stuck with it eventually anyways,...
One of the downsides of deregulation as it took this matter out of the hands of the locals, to wit;
Nation wide nuke fleet operators compel folks in places like Vermont to live with a nuke plant whether they like it or not. The merits versus the liabilities of a nuke plant for Vermonters is not relevant, the abrogation of their choice to continue that relationship is. The corporation is not forcing VY down the states elected representatives throats for the states own good. The corporation is invoking a federal license process to continue making profit whether the local population is willing to share in the liability for the benefits that come with that profit or not.
Essentially, it is the application of "eminent domain" for commercial profit.
Few states are going to willingly accept new nuke construction as they realize that once you let the nuclear bogeyman into your backyard you lose all future discretion to make the bogeyman play nice and come to the table when negotiating for his continued presence after the initial contract/licensing terms have fulfilled their mandate.
As pro-nuke as I am, I would be hard pressed to willingly let any large corporation based in some state 1000 miles away from my home, to be able to dictate terms to my children and grandchildren at license renewal time.
My generation is already saddling them with crippling debt, my generation can at least reserve to them the ability to choose as they best see fit on issues this fundamental 40 years after we said okay.
Based on the VY and Pilgrim examples, my voting yes today will negate their ability to choose 40 years later. I owe them better.
State by state long term storage at least allows the states to get back some strong influence on just how profitable that corporation's continued operation will be when operating in flagrante delicto of the locals preferences as deemd best by their elected representatives.
(sic)