> But nuclear power does not give that kind of value to a user That wasn't the point. The point is that right now people can't even envision that nuclear can b

> But nuclear power does not give that kind of value to a user That wasn't the point. The point is that right now people can't even envision that nuclear can be done more efficiently because there isn't being invested much in nuclear. Just as people couldn't imagine cheap IMUs or electrical cars that were actually as good, and often better, than cars with combustion engines. It was an observation about people. Not things. If you look at the current energy crisis in Europe, that's one of those wakeup calls that could, and should, change our awareness of energy mix. Even before the Ukraine war, Europe was heading for an energy crisis because it was not investing enough in constant power sources. Focus has been on renewables, which is well and good, but wind and solar are intermittent. And as Norway is discovering, with changing weather patterns, hydroelectric becomes a challenge as well. To illustrate how serious the crisis is: a lot of businesses are energy intensive. For instance a grocery store requires enormous amounts of cooling. Bakeries require electricity to drive huge ovens. Some of these businesses see nearly an order of magnitude higher electricity costs. There are farms where crops get plowed into the ground because farmers can't afford the energy to process the produce and bring it to market. This doesn't scare people nearly as much as it should. So the value is rather obvious at this point.