3 ms·
Certainly does... and don't forget that we are tied into paying that price for the life of the plant. And then on the hook for the decommissioning costs and sto
by ljf 7y ago
Certainly does... and don't forget that we are tied into paying that price for the life of the plant. And then on the hook for the decommissioning costs and storage of the waste. And are basically paying for much of the development cost, and providing a low interest loan...
I cannot wait until storage options work financially and the case for coal, gas and nuclear is a moot point as the costs of renewables are so low.
- jabl 7y ago> don't forget that we are tied into paying that price for the life of the plant. Construction + 35 years, actually. (expected life 60-80 or more years) > And then on the hook for the decommissioning costs and storage of the waste. Not sure how it works in the UK, but in most places nuclear operators are required to pay a certain percentage of operating revenue into a government fund to cover the decommissioning and waste storage costs. Exactly so the taxpayers aren't left with the cleanup bill. > And are basically paying for much of the development cost, and providing a low interest loan... What the UK is largely paying for is actually capital costs due to refusing to provide a state guaranteed low interest loan. Had they done that they could have gotten it for half the price. Here's one alternative way to finance similar projects in the UK: http://www.dieterhelm.co.uk/energy/energy/the-nuclear-rab-model/ http://www.dieterhelm.co.uk/energy/energy/the-nuclear-rab-mo...