I don't feel like this is at all a fair or appropriate response to GP. They all seemed like very valid points. Which points fall under the "grinding an axe" category, as opposed to "valid criticism" category?
Point 2 is highly debatable. DOE is funding TerraPower's Natrium (Bill Gates company) which is a fast reactor, to the tune of 2.5B as part of the Advanced Reactor Demo Program. So a lot of people in the industry believe fast reactors can be commercially viable.
I don't feel like this is at all a fair or appropriate response to GP. They all seemed like very valid points. Which points fall under the "grinding an axe" category, as opposed to "valid criticism" category?