> So just how many reactors will $80 billion buy? Assuming an average of $16 billion per AP1000—slightly less than for Vogtle, and allowing for cost reductions from economies of scale and learning-by-doing—the plan would mean five new reactors. That would represent an increase of about 5.7 percent in total U.S. nuclear energy generation capacity, if all the reactors currently in service remain online.

Just for comparison, China is spending $20-$30 billion a year on nuclear with 29 power plants under construction (half of world total under construction). While this $80 billion will fund about 5?

I have been a big fan of nuclear for decades. But why now?

Solar with battery storage is about to be so inexpensive and rapid to deploy that perhaps 100% of new capacity should be added this way.

Start with the solar arrays and then add the batteries. They will add to the max immediately. While you are deploying the solar, batteries will improve.

Lithium is already cheap enough. Sodium is going to be even cheaper and much safer to boot.