The barriers to entry for new reactors are absurd to the point of ridiculousness. The regulations are insane.
That's why new reactor designs, which are really necessary never seem to go anywhere.
However, the proposal to shut down plants at the end of their planned service life, ignores the fact that that is only the planned life of the reactor. Many plants, both nuclear and otherwise have a "planned" life that is much shorter than could actually be achieved. Same is true for renewables like wind, which could have service lives well beyond the plan.
My basic point is that its silly to take any zero emissions power generation capability offline while there still exists ANY generation capacity coming from non-zero emissions sources.
The impression I get from global warming alarmists is that this is a crisis. Well, if that is so than ANY zero emissions power source should be good enough.
i.e. the risk of nuclear disaster is infinitesimally small in the face of the disaster that global warming alarmists claim is coming. Ergo, its stupid to get rid of any zero emissions power sources while the planet is on the line.
Honest risk assessment against the stated potential outcomes (if the global warming alarmists are taken at face value) says we must do this.