I don’t want the government picking winners or losers in the energy field.... we tried it - it sucked.
I would love to see our government put resources towards the next energy revolution - thorium. I still believe the science behind the molten salt reactors for this much more plentiful (and cheap) fuel that cannot be weaponized holds tremendous promise. Consider it another “man on the moon type effort.”
I think solar at this point (and in the near future) only has localized and specialized application, but if these things were competitive I would definitely line the southern facing side and roof of my barn with it!
Even governmentally financing thorium has that same risk... we might ensconce some sub-optimal thorium technology.
I’d say that the answer will be encouraged by evolving ideas of what is acceptable behavior from a nuclear reactor. If it needs to be independently powered, for one thing, to avert a significant disaster — maybe this will become intolerable, like we would not countenance a car that had no seat belts, whatever freedom we might like in actually using them.
Thorium isn't the panacea people paint it as. Nor is the pebble-bed reactor. And it still produces fissionable (U-233) that can be weaponized. As a chemist, I shudder at the potential materials problems of working with all those fluoride salts.
Get the cost of solar cells down enough and you will want to outfit your barn, your house, and your chicken coop with them. They also need to be more modular and “idiot proof” for quick and easy installs.
Even using current technology and install costs, the case for solar cells is compelling in high energy cost areas like Hawaii. The payback there is less than 5 years, which is a pretty darn good ROI.