Info I have should be findable from WSJ or NYT archives because I remember reading it when I had a WSJ subscription. Below is what I remember reading, not my personal comments about the various technical and regulatory issues involved.
New generation nuclear power plants are supposed to be smaller than current models and put out on a more assembly line basis. I believe these would be new design uranium fueled plants with some enhanced saftey measures and proliferation resistance built in.
Besides ramping up the manaufacturing speed, the smaller standardized designs are supposed to coexist with a streamlined regulatory approval regime. Think the "big box store" approach to nuclear power plant development with intended markets not only in the US but around the world.
There would also be implied competition with other nuclear power plant exporters such as Russia. This would reflect comically on what assumptions can be made about the current nuclear power plant stock. Russia at present exports only the VVER design, modelled closely on a GE / Westinghouse model that is already considered relatively safe operationally as well as low risk for proliferation. That is arguing new designs are superior implicitly underscores legitimate concerns about existing infrastructure.
For myself, with growing markets in underdeveloped countries, I would expect to hear arguments that energy demand will almost certainly outstrip available fossil fuel supply. That would suggest that increased nuclear power development is almost inevitable. Then the question becomes what international measures would be required to strengthen dialogue and controls about nuclear technology and waste management.
As you might expect I do not think bombing Iraq and kowtowing to US World domination will enhance this regime, so I am strugglingt o think what measures would matter!
DoreneC
DoreneC