This isn't commitment. It's lip service.

I found an article at the Jacksonville (Fla.) Times that really details how a utility should NOT position itself for the nuclear resurgence. The only thing they did, really, was say "we might throw in on something that'll pay off twenty years from now, or so.. maybe." We don't need people or utilities or local or state governments giving lip service to nuclear energy; we need either commitment or silence. The pros and cons are known; the history is known (apparently not by the author of the linked article, though, who credits TMI with the cutoff in nuclear plant building that had already happened) and the lead time is as short as several years for a committed utility and community.

We could do without comment from JEA, really, in this case.