Anyone who cares about numbers isn't going to form their opinions reading HN in 2024, the debate for them has been settled since the 1980s. We're in a 40 year run where people who can invest in nuclear reactors are better off than people who do not.
If there is anything to talk about seriously it hasn't come up on HN in the last few years. The last time something happened that moved the needle on whether there was any real policy question by the numbers was probably Chernobyl.
I wonder though how much is it that nuclear was helping economically, and how much was it that an already strong economy could afford to splurge on nuclear?
If there is anything to talk about seriously it hasn't come up on HN in the last few years. The last time something happened that moved the needle on whether there was any real policy question by the numbers was probably Chernobyl.