France has less nuclear power than we do by a factor of two so lets not go there. I don't think you get that renewable + natural gas makes up a full 77% of the power plants under construction. And the greatest share of that at 42% was renewable. Where is the space for nuclear? You are basically advocating we replace renewable energy with nuclear power plants. Why, what on earth could possibly have you advocating we replace renewable with nuclear?
I just don't get it. By the way wind is cheaper than nuclear.
New Nuclear power - 25-30 cents/kWh
Wind power - 5-6 cents/kWh
source for nuclear
source for wind
second source for wind
a table for you
At this point, I don't see a single reason on earth to go with nuclear over wind. What is the benefit?
As for solar power, it is rapidly become cheaper and is already at parity in three states. It currently stands at 19.27 cents/kWh for industrial roof top installations.
source For widespread power installation, the price is expected to be 10 cents/kWh by next year.
Several sources agree with it coming in line with the entire grid average by 2015. Solar power capacity construction is up 259% from 2010 over 2009 in the US which is shattering cost.
Geothermal energy costs 5.5 cents per kWh. Enough said about that.
source
Hydro is built out unfortunately and biomass costs are generally low but isn't done on a massive scale yet. I will look up some stats for that later. The point is that nuclear is more expensive than every single form of renewable energy I have listed here.