Sidney Bernsen, Ph.D., Former Chief Nuclear Engineer for Bechtel Power Corporation: I read the presentation Ted Rockwell gave at the 33 Annual WNA Conference in London and commend him for a clear and rational argument for promoting Nuclear Power as the preeminent solution to our energy future - not CO2 sequestration, not Solar, not windmills. However, as has been the case time and time again we keep finding ways to shoot ourselves in the foot whenever great opportunities emerge. There clearly is a high risk that the unreasonably high projected costs of current nuclear power plant designs could prevent them from obtaining the financing needed to license and build them. While most successful industries continue to provide products at continually reduced cost or products with significantly more useful features at similar costs, the nuclear power industry is moving in reverse.
(Barry Brook, Staffan Qvist) Australia Sweden - Displacement of fossil fuels by nuclear power in 25 to 34 years01.May.2017
Barry Brook, Faculty of Science, Engineering & Technology, U. of Tasmania, Australia & Staffan Qvist, Dept. of Physics and Astrophysics, Uppsala University, Sweden: This documents the excellent French and Swedish nuclear power plant construction programs in the 1960s to 1990s. It then extrapolates to a prediction that the whole world could be on 100 % nuclear power within 25 - 34 years. This must assume that the rest of the world has similar government support and cooperation, similar stable, honest leadership, sound economies, industrial capabilities, education systems, etc. and that the construction companies and nuclear fuel demands for France and Sweden can be quickly increased to those of the whole world. It assumes that the world will use the same nuclear technology as the Swedish and French programs of the 1970s to 90s. In reality, it may take several hundred years to replace 50% of fossil fuels with advanced nuclear technologies that still need development and testing.
John Shanahan, Dr. Ing., Civil Engineer: With financial and management situations of Toshiba, Westinghouse, Areva, and GE in the nuclear power business, the world's capability to build new nuclear power plants has obviously been set back. China, Russia and South Korea are now the leading sources of new nuclear power plants. How France and the United States might make a come back is not known at this time. This is a simple estimate of how long it might take to have nuclear become 50% of the world's electric generating capacity. The conclusion is that it will probably take several hundred years to get to 50% nuclear electric generating capacity. This has significant implications for energy planning.
Debalina Ghoshal, Gatestone Institute International Policy Council: China is working the most to expand the use of nuclear power on land and sea. In April 2016, reports began coming in that China has plans to build floating nuclear power plants in the South China Sea. Final assembly of the reactor is reported to start in coastal city of Huludao, in Liaoning province, and will be built by Bohai Shipbuilding Heavy Industry Co Ltd, a unit of China Shipbuilding Industry Corp (CSIC). China's 2016 nuclear plan, a component of the China's 13th five-year plan, is evidently to complete 58 nuclear reactors by 2020 and build another 100 gigawatt-sized reactors by 2030.