In the US, nuclear power is already cheaper than coal because we get most of it from old plants that have already paid for their construction costs, so now we're just paying operating and maintenance costs. Now imagine how much the situation would improve with any of these way of decreasing nuclear costs (in order of increasing radicalness):<p>* Mass-production of modular conventional reactors, like China is gearing up to do with AP1000 plants.<p>* Mass-production of smaller fourth-generation reactors, such as pebble beds (again, China is doing this) or some of the various breeder reactors, like the Hyperion Power Module.<p>* The same as above, but with Brayton-cycle gas turbines instead of steam turbines. This leads to simplified reactors and higher thermodynamic efficiency and quite significantly lower costs.<p>* The same as above, and then you stick them on a boat. This lets you float them to wherever they're needed, and the sea-water handles their cooling needs without costly cooling towers, and they can provide water desalination with waste heat. A nuclear aircraft carrier is already providing large amounts of fresh water to Haiti, and other countries are having serious water problems, and would pay good money for this. More here:<p><a href="http://finger-tree.blogspot.com/2009/11/floating-nuclear-plants-for-cheap-power.html" rel="nofollow">http://finger-tree.blogspot.com/2009/11/floating-nuclear-pla...</a><p>* Liquid fluoride thorium reactors. I love LFTRs; they're so damn <i>beautiful</i> that I'd recommend having a look at them just to appreciate the cleverness. They can be made at any size, they're self-regulating, they can load-follow beautifully, they can use supercritical CO2 turbines for cooling, the waste is tiny and becomes safe after about 500 years, and the fuel supply is enormous.