> Never believe someone who's never built a nuclear plant on what their design will cost. > More and more I think it's really public communication/PR/education

> Never believe someone who's never built a nuclear plant on what their design will cost. > More and more I think it's really public communication/PR/education that matters most for nuclear. I'm almost 30 years old and I live in France. While I see nuclear science as very cool and futuristic, I also just dont want to see anymore nuclear reactors. Especially since we showed that batteries and renewable energies have room for improvements. Even people who are supposed to know how to build nuclear reactors don't know how to do it : https://www.reuters.com/article/us-edf-nuclearpower-flamanville/french-regulator-puts-edf-flamanville-nuclear-plant-on-safety-watch-idUSKCN1VW0Y5 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-edf-nuclearpower-flamanvi... Flamanville's reactor has 10 years of lag and costs tripled to billions of euros. Guess where does the money come from ? Our taxes. All this money (and UK money) could have been invested in consuming less (smarter consumption, more efficiency), improve battery technologies and improve renewable energies. To me, the goal of 50% of nuclear energy should even be lowered to 30%.