Well it would be amusing, if the anti-nuke/"gas forever" industry wasn't responsible for the loss of seven million lives per year to air pollution with it's very, very, very, very, very transparent rhetorical selective attention.

These people are so evil and stupid that they'll prowl around the internet day and night to make a case that nuclear energy is a failure, even though right now on this planet there are 60 new nuclear reactors under construction, 51 of them each being of a size sufficient to produce, in one small building, more electricity than all of wind turbines in Denmark.

It's pretty funny too, that these people engage in wild eyed enthusiasm for the solar industry, which has not, is not and will not ever release us from the dangerous fossil fuel and biomass combustion that kills seven million people a year, about 800 every hour.

Here's a link to the list of solar companies that went bankrupt in the last ten years, squandering the resources of anyone stupid enough to have invested in them: Greentech's list of solar company failures since 2009

The 2012 portion of the list is rather long. Here's an excerpt:

I note that in many cases these companies, which produce nothing at all after having run a scam, were subsidized with tax dollars, money that could have otherwise been spent on providing health care for the poor, or raising teacher salaries, protecting wilderness, educating engineers and scientists, including nuclear engineers and scientists, each of whom would have worked to save even more lives than the nuclear industry has already saved, a figure that James Hansen, climate scientist puts at 1.8 million lives.

But just as the assholes in the anti-nuke/"gas forever" industry choose to focus all their energy complaining about Fukushima while not showing a whit of concern for the 800 people who die every hour from air pollution, 24 hours a day, 365 days per year (366 on leap years), they love to point to financial difficulties in nuclear companies.

The world built over 400 nuclear reactors in a period of twenty years, and the country that built the most of them, the United States, enjoyed some of the least expensive electricity in the world. Of course the anti-nukes, with their heads so far up their asses that they will never get the shit out of their eyes and mouths are perfectly content to argue, in real Trumpian fashion, that what has already happened is impossible.

Well whatever. The anti-nuke community, which consists 99% of people who are entirely unfamiliar with the contents of science books is nothing more than a mob of arsonists complaining about forest fires.

The "economic" problem of the nuclear industry is nothing more than this:

1. The nuclear industry is required to do what no other industry can do, be entirely risk free, at least in the minds of the assholes who insist that one death from radiation is more than 70 million deaths from air pollution every decade.

2. A nuclear plant is designed to last between 60 and 80 years, not twenty years like wind turbines or ten years before the inverters become even more electronic waste in the case of solar trash. Thus a nuclear plant is an investment in the future, and the returns on those investments will not address the mindless greed of the short term thinkers who puke carbon dioxide into the atmosphere destabilizing, irreversibly, the future of the entire biosphere.

The Oyster Creek nuclear reactor is still powering my lights and computer, even though it came on line in 1969; it was a gift from my parents generation to mine. But the assholes in the anti-nuke/"gas forever" industry don't give a shit about future generations. Rather than address what they themselves are doing they make glib and completely illiterate statements like, um, the world will be totally powered by "renewable energy" by 2050.

3. Nuclear power, the only industry that has successfully stored its by products for more than half a century without a single loss of life, is required to explain how it will contain its so called "wastes" - which can be shown to be something quite different than "waste" for eternity, although the dangerous fossil fuel industry is allowed to indiscriminately dump its wastes directly into the atmosphere without much comment, and doesn't even need to show how it can contain its wastes for the next twenty minutes.

To sum it up, the anti-nuke industry consists wholly and entirely of mindless twits who look at the nuclear industry and only the nuclear industry using criteria that no other industry has ever come close to meeting.

If we had invested the same trillion dollars in nuclear power plants as we squandered in the last ten years on the failed, toxic and useless solar industry, we could have surely built one or two hundred reactors which would now be producing tens of exajoules of primary energy.

But that wasn't to be. The lie often manages to suppress the truth. It's easy to see how an awful person like Trump could stumble mindlessly into a position of vast responsibility. People are stupid. Regrettably not all of the stupidity is on the right however. We have anti-nukes who claim to be "environmentalists" even though they know nothing at all, zero, about the environment. The signature of their stupidity is written clearly and unambiguously in the planetary atmosphere. Yesterday, January 29, 2017, the reading at the Mauna Loa carbon dioxide observatory was 405.76 ppm of carbon dioxide. No one now living, infant to centenarian, will ever see a reading there below 400 ppm again.

This of course, will not deter a single anti-nuke from burning gas and coal to power their computer to skulk around the internet to complain about "nuclear economics." Of course, Chinese nuclear engineers couldn't give a shit what stupid westerners think. They're living with the most polluted air on earth, and they're going to do something about it. Unlike the anti-nuke navel gazers and lint pickers, they're not idiots.

Have a nice day tomorrow.