Nuclear power in a free enterprise environment is the pathway to abundant low-cost electricity.

The rising cost of electricity is primarily due to the entrenched nature of utility monopolies, which restrict consumer choice and inhibit market competition. As the electricity demand steadily increases-driven by factors such as the proliferation of electric vehicles, population growth, and the rapid expansion of energy-intensive data and AI centers-electricity supply remains limited by outdated regulatory frameworks and market models.

Protected from competition, utilities have a minimal incentive to innovate or control prices. Increased expenditures associated with integrating unreliable, intermittent, and low-energy-density renewable energy sources, volatility in fossil fuel markets, and heightened regulatory requirements are passed on to consumers. Without the discipline imposed by competition, there is little to prevent continual price increases; thus, as demand surpasses supply, the fundamental principles of economics mandate that costs will continue to escalate for all who rely on the electrical grid, which is everyone.

Historically, nuclear power systems have been approximately 97% identical to coal power plants, with the primary difference being the heat source, which is the energy required to convert water into steam to power the turbines. Coal mining operations faced threats to their monopolies when the heat from a small percentage of naturally occurring radioactive decay of uranium (U-235) proved to be millions of times more potent than the heat generated by burning coal. The uranium (U235) that occurs naturally as a trace material in the coal contains more energy than the coal itself. The coal industry, instead of viewing nuclear power as a rival, should have continued its early practice of promoting nuclear power as its "next generation" power. We are trying to give the fossil fuel industry a good reason to return to its previous policy of embracing nuclear power.

The recent craze for clean energy did not revisit the powerful clean energy solution of nuclear power but came up with the absolute worst solutions possible – wind and solar power. These are the most expensive, least reliable, and environmentally disastrous "solutions" to electricity production that anybody could have cooked up. Trying to integrate these boondoggles into the various national grids is very expensive and causes blackouts in other countries.

The strange world of nuclear power centers on the realization that nature has provided us with a unique solution to improve our quality of life, yet our society is amassing as many obstacles as possible to its fruition. Commercial nuclear power has a 70-year track record of enormous success to be proud of.

The benefits of nuclear energy have been obscured by the massive amount of money spent to create a fog of doubt in the public's perception of these benefits. Techniques such as this used to be called "antitrust" or "unfair competition", but these days they seem to be "business as usual".

This "business as usual" is especially troubling because the very Government we trust to lookout for our best interests is complicit in creating the fog that is clouding its progress. We can ponder why this is the case all we want, but we need to focus on how to reverse the damage caused over the last 40 years of the marketing of electricity to the public.

The marketing of electricity is now conducted through business entities called "utilities," and current government thinking has led us to believe that electricity can only be marketed as a monopoly.

Therefore, we are limited to purchasing our electricity from only one company. This is further complicated by the fact that there is no other commodity that directly affects our quality of life than electric energy. If you possess this commodity, you are part of the top tier of wealthy societies. If you do not, you are relegated to third-world status with a very meager quality of life. The very thing that nature has given us to lift our lives out of poverty is subjected to government-supported obstacles designed to deny us the maximum benefit of this bounty purposely.

Even proponents of nuclear power seem focused on relegating this industry to failure. No product is marketed by describing dangers that could happen, even if those dangers have a proven history of actual safety. No person has ever been hurt from the normal operations of nuclear power production in almost 70 years of actual history. The Chernobyl incident did not happen under "normal operations". Nobody was hurt because of the failures of either Three Mile Island or Fukushima. No other industry can even come close to this safety record. We accept the risk of driving cars when more than 40,000 people each year die from such behavior. We accept the risk of flying commercial airlines that kill an average of more than 500 people per year. The safety burden on these industries is almost non-existent compared to the massive burden imposed on the nuclear power industry by government involvement in this business.

It is difficult to justify the stringent restrictions and prohibitive progress imposed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, especially when their claim of preventing safety failures contradicts the fact that the nuclear industry has been the safest on the planet over the last 70 years.

However, the most significant burden on the nuclear power industry is the massive weight of utility monopolies. Customers must purchase power from a single source, regardless of the cost. If the enormous costs imposed by "renewables" crop up on your bill, the price will rise. If the cost of coal and natural gas increases, you have no alternative but to pay the price.