EU court rules nuclear energy is clean energy

Your comment is just disinformation at this point. If nuclear was very expensive China wouldn't have built 30 in the last 10 years despite massive opposition.

In reality when you take all the costs into account there is no cheaper form of energy generation and there likely never will be, outside of cost decreases in Fission based nuclear itself.

It is hard for humans to work with exponential curves. Solar went from 15 cents per kwh to 5 cents per kwh over the last 10 years.

Anticipating such a rapid decline is hard and a lot of people still are stuck on outdated data.

Sure China commissioned these plants in the past and will plan more, but it won't be due to cost.

But you don't need to work with exponential curves to know that you can use solar only for like half a day and even less during winter. Those solar installation now are big part of overall cost. And with majority of EU population living in flats where you gonna install them?

> If nuclear was very expensive

you have to start paying interest on loan from first day 1 even if construction starts on 100th day and if safety committee rules some part of approved design needs to change to improve safety it's own to demolish, clean and rebuild the new parts.

The problem is not design regulations but how much difficult on purpose goverment has made it in the west to construct one.

Solar installations are already so cheap that they are cheaper than the fuel being burned in existing power plants. So it makes sense to have them replace this kind of fuel burning.

They are still getting cheaper so there is no stopping solar.

I have seen statistics showing that solar parks currently cover less area than there are Golf courses (at least in Europe).