"It's true that the capital costs of nuclear power are high, but in all fairness a substantial part of those costs and the time required to build are caused by anti-nuclear pressure groups and other NIMBYs who drag the process out for decades in courts and through environmental review boards as a delaying tactic to discourage development by artificially running up the cost."
Citation needed.
For instance, please explain how the failure of WPPSS in the late 70's and early 80's was the result of this versus economic, technical, and competency factors. Ratepayers in the PNW are still paying for nuclear power they are not receiving to this day.
Then please explain how the new designs will escape this fate. After all, since there must be places which don't have this problem, these new designs must be operating successfully in large numbers. Where are these places?
In any case, it will still take decades for them to come on line in significant numbers at BEST (based on production estimates). And they would be replacing existing generating capacity in practice. They are not a useful solution when you can put solar on a roof of a structure within a few months.
Sure, it's not base load, but maybe we should be looking at a solution for that? We have decades, after all...