Partly true. I understand the NRC reformed its procedures this century. But even during the 1990s, standardization could have played a big role in limiting cost overruns, something that has plagued US designs and every other country including Canada, at least for their first reactor. Admittedly that’s not an on-budget expense, so any US advocate of standardization would have to base their argument on fewer expected surprises, a tougher sell.
I think it’s significant that the Energy Policy Act of 2005 was supported heavily by industry and was suppose to usher in a nuclear renaissance. There was no shortage of political will: it included subsidies that in the words of the economist John Quiggin, the “developers of wind and solar power could only dream of”. Ok, that got us Vogtle. But there was no nuclear renaissance. Which makes me think that the US nuclear industry was never quite clear on the concept.1
Since then, the Inflation Reduction Act has boosted subsidies further. We very well might see a few more plants built, mainly because data centers want green and reliable energy – both at the same time.
1Eg: Nuclear power is creature of big government. No nuclear power plant has ever been built anywhere in the world without massive subsidies. It’s entirely non-coincidental that Vogtle was built by an old-fashioned regulated utility, and not within a deregulated energy market.
ETA:
Apologies to everyone. I posted this fission story to the fusion thread. Dang-nammit. I should have posted it here: Nuclear Power News and Debates I’ll report this mess to the mods.