Nuclear would get some serious economies of scale at 2500 units, so those prices aren't a fair comparison of what could be. I've long maintained here on HN, ho

Nuclear would get some serious economies of scale at 2500 units, so those prices aren't a fair comparison of what could be. I've long maintained here on HN, however, that under-investment in nuclear has made it not cost effective compared to renewables + storage (remember you don't need 100% storage.) At current market prices, nuclear doesn't make much sense. It could have really helped if we'd started earlier with it though, before renewables were in the picture.