Th nuclear industry in the West has failed spectacularly since the 70s. In the US, rank managerial incompetence has completely tanked the "nuclear renaissance" started in the last Bush years and throughout the Obama years. Despite large local support, huge regulatory support, and loan guarantees, building nuclear in the US in this century is an even worse deal than Hinkley!
Meanwhile, the nuclear industry falls back on blaming environmentalists and has vague complaints about regulations, but no suggestions on what to change. They refuse to acknowledge their own incompetence and massive failures, preferring to fight lost and old political battles, reliving the past.
There's way too much old, dead, stupid weight in the industry. If any of the new nuclear startups succeed they will need to make sure to avoid falling into the same traps and have a lot more self awareness than the current batch of decision makers and proponents.
Private industry can’t manage big capital projects like this.
The current management framework for these kinds of companies doesn’t allow corporate managers to take risks, and the culture of excessive compensation for executives leads them to price too much risk.
There's been a long campaign to close the Indian Point plant in Westchester County, NY that's only gained traction over the last seveal years. The main concerns are: evacuation in case of emergency, waste storage, terrorism, and environmental impact on the Hudson River due to hot-water discharge. It also doesn't supply that much of the area's total demand and one of the reactors is inactive.
Not saying that means there's no local support elsewhere, but it's definitely not universal. Maybe if it were a new plant things would be different.
The new "nuclear renaissance" plants, Vogtle and VC Summer, were welcomed with open arms.
Older reactors like Indian Point were built before all the risks were fully disclosed to the surrounding population, or at least before the first disasters, resulting in a lot of people dead set against them.
Nuclear has also allied itself with fossil fuel allies, which have of course abandoned nuclear as soon as they were the least bit uneconomic. At least in the US there hasn't seemed to be much emphasis at all on the low carbon aspect of nuclear from proponents, and they are all too happy to rag on renewables with bullshit arguments like land usage. Natural low-carbon allies are still seen as suspect or the enemy. Any reasonable carbon tax would mean that (existing) nuclear could compete economically, but I've never seen a nuclear proponent advocate for that.
Meanwhile, the nuclear industry falls back on blaming environmentalists and has vague complaints about regulations, but no suggestions on what to change. They refuse to acknowledge their own incompetence and massive failures, preferring to fight lost and old political battles, reliving the past.
There's way too much old, dead, stupid weight in the industry. If any of the new nuclear startups succeed they will need to make sure to avoid falling into the same traps and have a lot more self awareness than the current batch of decision makers and proponents.