This article is pretty much just hand-waving away any cost arguments against nuclear power. The author is saying that if we had modern designs of nuclear reacto

This article is pretty much just hand-waving away any cost arguments against nuclear power. The author is saying that if we had modern designs of nuclear reactors they would be much cheaper, they're essentially comparing hypothetical reactor designs against real, existing wind and solar power. That is hardly a fair comparison. The section on waste also feels disingenuous, they are directly equating waste from nuclear and solar/wind power by amount alone. The kinds of waste generated are not comparable at all, just comparing the amounts here as an argument against solar/wind makes me doubt the entire section.