This week your correspondent spoke with Mark Nelson of Radiant Energy Group, a nuclear energy consultancy, about how France was able to build out what is, famously, the most advanced and powerful nuclear grid in the world. Nelson, a good Oklahoma boy, is a fan of the French approach and in particular he has dived deep in the history of France's historic rollout of nuclear power in the 1970s and 1980s, the most ambitious in the world at the time or since, a program in some ways as impressive as the Apollo Program, and he told us the main lessons from that momentous event for America's drive to energy dominance today.

Here are the highlights:

Strong political will from the top. France had been working on nuclear reactor designs for many years, including miniature reactors for its submarines, but what turned a constellation of science projects into a massive building program was, of course, the political impetus from the Oil Shock. With a structurally weak currency and trade deficit, the French economy was particularly vulnerable to oil price spikes. The economic and strategic impacts of the Oil Shock is what gave the political impetus to turn interesting technology into a massive program.

A key, empowered leader. The hero of the story Nelson tells is Marcel Boiteux, who was the CEO of EDF, France's national utility, during the relevant time, from 1967 to 1979. And he is an inspiring character indeed: after graduating from the elite Ecole normale supérieure (like his father and grandfather before him) with a degree in economics in 1942, he escaped France and joined the Free French Forces, serving in the Italian and French campaigns and earning the Croix de Guerre for bravery. After the War, he made substantial contributions to economic theory, giving his name to the Ramsey-Boiteux Problem of optimal pricing for regulated monopolies. As leader of France's electricity monopoly, with the respect of his peers and strong political backing, and a long time horizon, he was able to push through what needed to be done.

Pick a proven, economically-sound reactor design. Perhaps the most controversial decisions of the program, which had to come early on, was for EDF to license a pressurized water reactor (PWR) design from Westinghouse and jilt the competing French design, which was based on gas-graphite technology. The decision was ruthlessly pragmatic: the Westinghouse reactor was proven, and was more economically efficient. This has implications for today, when most of the discussions around nuclear energy center on new designs like small reactors, PBMRs, thorium, and so on. While these experiments obviously have value and should be encouraged, Nelson believes, if you want to roll out nuclear energy fast and at scale today, you must go with an existing and proven reactor design. No doubt it took the urgency of the international situation and a leader of Boiteux's stature to make efficiency win over national pride. Which brings us to…

Open and vigorous intra-elite debate. The potted history of the French nuclear program holds that the proud French engineers at EDF wanted the French design, while the bean counters at the ministry of finance pushed through the decision to go with the American design. But, according to Boiteux's memoir, which Nelson regards as a kind of Bible of Making Nuclear Happen, that's not true. There were proponents of each choice in each camp. What made the difference was that there was an open, vigorous debate among all the stakeholders, all of whom were aligned on the overarching goal. It was through open debate among intelligent and aligned stakeholders that Boiteux was able to convince enough people of the rightness of the Westinghouse choice.

Execute, execute, execute. Nelson tells the story of how Boiteux got the call from the prime minister at 9am on a Saturday—Boiteux naturally being in his office at that time—asking, in so many words: "I want to know how many reactors you can build, and I want that answer two hours from now." When Boiteux came back with his answer, the prime minister said only: "More." The nuclear rollout was a titanic undertaking: the Plan Messmer was approved in 1974 and the last reactor was connected to the grid in 1999. Nelson notes that the men of Boiteux's generation had been both traumatized and forged by the experiences of the War and the French Resistance, and were determined to answer the call to Make France Great Again. Boiteux faced opposition at every turn, whether from local politicians who didn't want a nuclear plant in his area, to France's nascent environmental movement, to energy interests questioning the choice to go all-in on nuclear. Another cliché about the French program debunked by Nelson: this holds that the French just went with a cookie-cutter approach, building the exact same nuclear plants all over the country. That's not true either: while the core reactor design remained unchanged, the French kept improving and adapting many other aspects of plant design as they rolled it out. In short, wilful, pragmatic, intelligent, and determined execution is what accomplished it.

Roll it out where it's most efficient to do so. Nelson has a simple prescription for how the US can quickly and efficiently increase nuclear power: build more reactors on sites where there are existing plants. The location is already approved to nuclear, and is already hooked up to the grid. Makes sense to us.

We found this extremely enlightening, because it's different from the debates we normally see in America around this topic. There seems to be a general assumption that deregulation (which we certainly agree is necessary) will just magically cause a thousand nuclear reactors to bloom. But if America is serious about "energy dominance" and nuclear, especially on a tight timeline (which competition in a field like AI seems to demand) it will have to come to the top, and prudent-but-less-sexy choices like "Build out existing reactors instead of betting it all on unproven designs" become more compelling.

Check out our interview with Mark Nelson of Radiant Energy Group on YouTube, Spotify, and Apple Podcasts.

Policy News You Need To Know

#Censorship #ReadTheRoom — For many years, Ryan T. Anderson's book "When Harry Became Sally" was inexplicably delisted by Amazon. Then, equally inexplicably, after President Trump's election, the book was listed again. Now, apparently, it's gone again. It is an outrage.

#DebtCeiling — Presumably in response to a widely-publicized (including by us) BPC report that the debt limit may be hit as early as June, CBO published analysis stating that it estimates the debt limit will "only" be hit in August or September.

#Immigration — A Bloomberg analysis shows that S&P 500 corporate executives have mentioned immigration in the first quarter more than ever, saying that they are worried about labor supply. This is good. This is another way of saying that wages should be going up.

#Immigration — Rep. Paul Gosar has introduced a bill to eliminate the OPT program. Optional Practical Training (OPT) is a work authorization program for F-1 international students. It allows students to stay in the US and work for up to 12 months, with an additional 24 months extension for "STEM" students. While not necessarily a bad idea in theory, it is notoriously rife with abuse, with students signing up for fake degrees and essentially working full time. The bill is H.R. 2315, the Fairness for High-Skilled Americans Act.

#Reg — Cato has an interesting report on Argentine President Javier Milei's deregulation agenda, and the lessons it may hold for the US.

#SecondAmendment — The House Judiciary Committee just voted to advance the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, which would amend Title 18 of the United States Code to require all U.S. states to recognize concealed carry permits granted by other states. It would also allow the concealed transport of handguns across state lines, as long as it is permitted by both states. An armed society is a polite society. Sadly, it's unlikely to get past filibuster in the Senate.

#PublicHealth — So much of what passes for medical science and public health in the US is politicized or just fraudulent claptrap, as we all learned during Covid. However, a lot of medical science is sound! This is both the peril and promise of the appointment of a figure like RFK, Jr. to head HHS. On the peril side, he seems to have tapped a notorious vaccine skeptic to lead a study on the purported link between vaccines and autism.

#Science — However, on the promise side: the excellent Jay Bhattacharya has been confirmed as NIH director!

#DOGE — Important, from NR: "President Donald Trump expressed support on Tuesday for a rescissions package that would codify some of the cuts that have been recommended by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an Elon Musk-led initiative to shrink the size and scope of the federal bureaucracy."