Where will waste-eating reactors be built? Many nuclear power plants were designed to house more reactors than were actually built. They could definitely be built onsite--especially given that towns that made it to the short list for a new reactor are fighting to get it. Who will pay? Utilities will pay for the cheapest power plant they can find. Currently, there is national-level political opposition to nuclear, so they go to gas and coal. I have no clue where you get your numbers for the cost of spent fuel pools. Cite something. And no, the money from the spent fuel surcharge didn't go to spent fuel pools--that money went to the government, and the government doesn't pay for spent fuel pools. Surprisingly, at the start of a project, engineers and managers do not always know what the final cost will be, especially if the project is first-of-a-kind. The number isn't secret, it just doesn't exist. Current worst-case estimates are $56 billion. Like I said earlier, we don't like it, either. Don't blame DoE's cost overruns on the concept of nuclear energy. What does the cost of oil have to do with the cost of nuclear-derived electricity? What's your point? Do you have any numbers that you didn't pull out of your ear? My solution (and most other pro-nuclear people's solution) to the waste problem is to recycle it instead of burying this useful material in the ground. What other "huge problems" are there? You singled out the waste problem, and I responded to it. As for "self-regulation," you assume incorrectly. I would give the NRC a budget and stop requiring it to assess fees to recover 82% of its operating costs. I would set up a system modeled on the FAA. And yes, NRC bureaucrats are paid over $200 per man-hour by the utilities. When I first heard that, I didn't believe it, either. So you know what I did? I went to the Code of Federal Regulations and looked it up. Guess what? It was true, and there were even more fees and they were even more exorbitant than I thought. Look it up (especially 10 CFR 171 and 10 CFR 52). Consultant engineers are lucky to get $50. Want to talk about a revolving door? How about the anti-nuclear activists that Bill Clinton appointed? And who would you rather put in there--someone without experience in the industry? There is a major difference between Ralph Nader's experience suing people and those people's technical experience. Would you appoint a dentist principal of a school? Hanford, Rocky Flats, and Oak Ridge are weapons labs. Chernobyl was a crazy stunt on a defective model of the worst reactor class in the world. You simply can't point to a light-water reactor, CANDU, or IFR that has killed or injured someone in operation. Will taxpayers pay for this? If you count the government paying for its own costs incurred instead of leaning on the industry for financial support, then yes. Will consumers pay for this? CWIP surcharge bans have helped make nuclear power plants the only item which businesses are legally not allowed to raise prices to buy. Things cost money, and even if the government bought 320-odd reactors to eliminate use of coal in this country the public health benefit would be worth the cost. Of course, this isn't what happens; utilities pay for the reactors and most of the government's costs out of liquid assets. Lump-sum money throwing doesn't help the core problem. Pro-nuclear people would gladly forfeit every cent of funding for nuclear energy from this year's energy bill to have the regulations restructured in a way that makes sense. The cost estimates you linked to were industry projections. Find the cost of wind in operation. Here's a question I have for you. Who's going to pay for these wind turbines to run 15-30% of the time? We have a national grid. Wind just doesn't work. I wish it did, but it doesn't work. 1.82 cents per kilowatt-hour is not my estimate, it is taken from actual costs using actual math, instead of number-assisted speculation. The only real number you've used so far is the number of nuclear power plants in the US. You have not yet even detailed these "extra costs" of which you speak--you simply look at the math and say that there are secret concealed numbers, then walk away. List your extra hidden costs. As I have said, I do not trust anyone's statements. I have my own brain and refuse to let anyone do my thinking for me.