> Vogtlr is the norm for advanced developed countries. It is for countries that only build a few reactors. Again, China and Korea don't have this problem becau

> Vogtlr is the norm for advanced developed countries. It is for countries that only build a few reactors. Again, China and Korea don't have this problem because they build lots of reactors. They aren't aliens. China doesn't even have cheap labor these days. The South Koreans are an advanced economy like us. They got good at it by doing it. There is no reason why we couldn't do that. We just don't want to and then we say it's not possible because we aren't good at it. It's circular logic. We've been saying it takes too long for decades when that is plenty of time to rebuild those skills and then build reactors quickly. We could've been done by now. > Look at all the Us construction projects from the 70's, before Three Mile Island. The chart in my last comment shows those reactors were built economically. If you look at the reactor build times at PRIS you can see the build times are quite impressive too: https://pris.iaea.org/PRIS/CountryStatistics/CountryDetails.aspx?current=US https://pris.iaea.org/PRIS/CountryStatistics/CountryDetails.... > I haven't heard anyone suggest that we should get rid of ALARA that works in the field Why is that surprising? They are trained and educated that this is the correct and lawful standard to which they must operate. It's baked in to the institutions. > You'll never convince me that's a sane way to make massive capital allocations. The alternative will be even more capital intensive and it's completely unproven. You need to build out thousands of miles of high voltage transmission and TWhs of battery/hydrogen/hydro storage. It's unproven. No nation has a majority wind/solar grid without fossil fuel backup. Some places are blessed with enough hydro resources but that won't work in the US. We already know you can mostly decarbonize a grid with nuclear because France did it 40 years ago.