I mostly agree with this in pragmatic sense. I'm seeking coulda woulda shoulda alternate history counterfactuals here, I argue no future nuclear proposal will make sense but in deep time, 60s, we missed the boat and could have been in a radically different place.

There is no future path where even SMR can arrive at price point and power rating to replace the overbuild of wind and solar with storage, which provides the same energy reliability. Overbuild sounds negative but it's not: you need more than nameplate power and more units widely dispersed to avoid outages from local weather. With that comes more for storage, more for H2 conversion, desalination, other uses.

Basically, we should be further along our de-carbonisation. It's all about the past.