“‘How can one build new nuclear plants when all the world understood, or should have understood, that Fukushima was not an exception but a part of the industry?’ asks Roth. “
Well, one ‘could’ build safe green molten salt reactors (MSR) small modular reactors (SMR) running on something that can at the same time burn the depleted fuels and the fuel from dismantled weapons, in so getting rid of a ‘costly’ problem, and torium, which is abundant at the least for one thousand years, ‘and’ all the above dumping the useless regulations which require to design power-plants as unique prototypes and certifying them one by one, to reach a ‘unified certification’ for all the small reactors built with industrial methods, and transported on the final site for integration.
Is it going to happen ? Probably not because politicians and militaries want pressurized water reactors to build the ‘bomb,’ and the industry wants to recycle consolidated technology for which they have amortized the research in decades, and keep the ‘side profits,’ of operating such way, because obviously is more profitable to them. Same issue of detroit, we keep building gas guzzlers, because the banksters that own GM also own the oil companies and need to sell more gas, ‘convenient.’
The bottom line of the issue is that nuclear has a long life cycle and can guarantee peak power, while a lot of renewable alternatives have issues there, that MSR are safer than pressurized reactors ‘by design,’ ‘and’ that SMR are ‘too small to fail big,’ to use a comparison (appropriate) with the saga of the banking system. Now the Chinese are actually doing something in this direction, trying the technology with Westinghouse, in a pilot project in China, but at this point there has not been the necessary support from the environmentalists to such technology, which is actually more green than most of the alternatives, so the issue has become political.