Shellenberger has a new article in @cityjournal that misrepresents and drives confusion about the importance of US nuclear exports.

Most egregiously it cites (largely) anonymous nuclear industry officials complaining about US nuclear export policy https://twitter.com/CityJournal/status/1293929058984755201

Let's make something clear. The primary reason we can't get an export deal with Saudi Arabia is not non-proliferation, though thats of absolute paramount importance.

Its because we don't have a reactor design we can export. The AP1000 is obsolete and no other options yet exist

It claims that the GOP is agnostic on nuclear and Democrats are openly antagonistic.

Look at votes. Federal support for nuclear and innovation is as bipartisan as energy policy gets these days....

Supporting a nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia is a challenge because 1) they are an evil autocracy that both parties are reevaluating and 2) anyone serious about nuclear non-proliferation suspects KSA wants enrichment cause they want a bomb

Anyone knowledgeable or serious about non-proliferation would describe KSA goals as not adhering to the "gold standard" set by the UAE. That neither gold standard nor the UAE are mentioned in Shellenberger's piece are massive red flags he is out of touch with the nuclear industry

Other red flags include: comparing Greta Thunberg's critique of capitalist growth with Chinese genocide in the same paragraph, claiming Bechtel should replace Westinghouse as America's nuclear "firm", or claiming that Russia/China are selling SMR designs (they are NOT)

I implore you, if you are nuclear friendly, agnostic, or even an opponent, Shellenberger does not represent the conventional nor advanced nuclear industry.

His arguments have serious inaccuracies, obfuscate the industry's serious challenges, and trivialize the climate challenge

That he can get so much traction is an indictment of modern media.

Russia and China are serious strategic competitors to US and global democratic interests. Nuclear power is an axis of that.

But charlatan prognostications cannot guide us to the most effective responses