> No one, not the Chinese, Russians, French, Koreans, Japanese, Isrealis or the Americans Not true for the Chinese. They figured out that in order to drive co

> No one, not the Chinese, Russians, French, Koreans, Japanese, Isrealis or the Americans Not true for the Chinese. They figured out that in order to drive costs down you need to standardize and build the same reactor over and over again. The reactor is called Hualong One [1]. China has already built 4 domestically, 2 for Pakistan and has 11 under construction. 4 more such reactors were approved for the domestic market [2] and 4 other reactors are under contract for the foreign market (3 in Pakistan, 1 in Argentina). The 6 reactors that China has already built took between 5 and 8 years each. The average construction time is about 6.5 years. As for the cost, that is difficult to estimate for the domestic reactors but the 2 reactors built for Pakistan were delivered for $6.5 BN. They were delivered on time and on budget. Since each such reactor generates 1.1 GW of electricity, this comes to $3 billion per GW. This is definitely economically profitable. Now, if you want to reply that solar and wind are even more profitable, that is probably true, but that's moving the goal posts. Your claim was that nobody, including China, was able to build profitable nuclear at all, and that is patently not true. Second, the 2 reactors delivered to Pakistan were among the first wave of Hualong One reactors built. Three of the 4 finalized domestic reactors were delivered after the Pakistani ones. It is entirely possible that China has achieved some cost reductions through repetition, and the cost of the reactors currently under construction is significantly lower, and the future one will achieve still further efficiencies. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hualong_One https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hualong_One [2] https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/China-approves-construction-of-four-new-reactors https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/China-approves-const...