This post is part of a series in which TheStockAdvisors.com asked financial experts to name their top stock pick if McCain or if Obama wins the election.

"If McCain is elected, we would suggest USEC (NYSE: USU); after slumbering for over 20 years, nuclear power is quickly emerging from hibernation and will be satisfying a much larger percentage of the nation's energy-hungry appetite during McCain administration," says value investor Nathan Slaughter, editor of Half-Priced Stocks.

"Currently, there are 104 nuclear plants in operation nationwide, which combined, account for 20% of the country's electricity. But both of those totals are set to rise markedly. Current forecasts suggest nuclear facilities could double their share and ultimately account for 40% of power in the U.S.

"There are several factors underpinning this resurgence in nuclear energy, not the least of which is $100 per barrel oil and elevated prices for natural gas and coal.

"Believe it or not, one kilogram of uranium-235 has the stored energy equivalent of 1,500 tons of coal. And while up-front construction expenses can be high, ongoing operating costs for nuclear reactors are running just $15-20 per megawatt hour, far cheaper than traditional plants.

"John McCain is an outspoken champion for the nuclear power movement, outlining ambitious plans to commit $315 billion towards the construction of 45 new reactors over the next two decades.

"Beyond that, he has a clear goal of achieving energy independence by building '100 new plants to power the homes and factories and cities of America.'

"All of this spells plenty of opportunity for USEC, owner of the nation's only uranium enrichment facility. The company is in the business of supplying fuel for commercial reactors around the world -- and competition is sparse.

"The firm also benefits from a longstanding nuclear non-proliferation treaty with Russia. Specifically, USEC participates in the salvaging of old Soviet nuclear warheads under the 'Megatons to Megawatts' program.

"The company has carved out a dominant market share and now supplies about half of the nation's enriched uranium (most of the rest comes from Russia).

The United States is a nation whose electric power generation system and grid is becoming increasing inadequate, even as the nation grapples with another energy problem -- the $4 per gallon gasoline era.

Moreover, an economic slowdown and a relatively mild summer have to-date reduced the typical electric load electric power generation plants would face, but that respite will end when the U.S. economy starts to expand at a healthy rate again. And when it does, electric power demand will increase.

What's one model the United States could follow to generate more electricity while the same time reducing coal-based pollution and climate change? France.

That's right: France. Nuclear power is experiencing a mild comeback in the United States, with 34 new reactor applications on file at the U.S.'s Nuclear Regulatory Agency. In France, it never left. Further, had the United States followed the French model, the U.S. would be vastly more energy self-sufficient today.

France: liberty, fraternity, equality, fission

Nuclear power never went out of style in France, and for this reason France is decades ahead of the United States -- and much of the world, for that matter -- regarding energy self-sufficiency, The New York Times reported. An astounding 77% of France's electricity comes from its 58 nuclear power plants, and it is a net-exporter of electricity to Europe. The United States has 104 nuclear power plants, which account for only 19.4% of its generated electricity, according to U.S. Department of Energy data, The Times reported.

The rise in commodity prices is set to complicate the growth plans for yet another sector.

Projected costs for a new generation of nuclear power plants on the drawing boards are increasing at an enormous rate -- in some cases double to quadruple their earlier, rough estimates - - The Wall Street Journal reported Monday(subscription required).

Further, that new generation of nuclear power plants has emerged as an important component of the United States' future energy supply, due to $100-plus oil and the technology's superiority to high-pollution, coal-fired energy plants, The Journal reported Monday. However, surging costs for cement, steel, and copper, among other factors, have caused nuclear plant construction costs to soar to $5-$12 billion -- a trend that could lead to delayed or canceled projects.

Rising energy costs

Economist Peter Dawson told BloggingStocks Monday what investors should take away from the rising nuclear plant cost phenomenon is not so much a comparison of the positives/negatives of each energy technology, but the rising cost of energy, across all platforms, in general.

Well this is probably not going to be promoted under GE's Ecomagination series: GE is expecting two new contracts to build nuclear power plants.

The company already has a series of nuclear power plants under management for Entergy Corp, so this will put GE in a position of being a nuclear plant leader, and part of an initiative by the current administration to invest more in nuclear power. GE will be working on building five new nuclear power plants.

The last nuclear power plant in the US had been finished in 1971, so GE is in position to become the forefront of this total sea change, prompted by fears of foreign oil dominance, high oil prices, and higher need for energy. Another example of GE looking forward.

And with Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore making an impassioned case that nuclear is the true green technology, maybe GE will be able to tout nuclear energy as part of their Ecomagination line of technologies. Or not...