5 ms·
$ 3 billion for 720 MW of power (2019 figure) [1]. More recent figure of $ 5.5 cents per KW/h [2]. So about 4x cost overrun leeway to be competitive in Europe.
by wjnc 4y ago
$ 3 billion for 720 MW of power (2019 figure) [1]. More recent figure of $ 5.5 cents per KW/h [2]. So about 4x cost overrun leeway to be competitive in Europe. That seems manageable?
[1] https://www.science.org/content/article/smaller-safer-cheaper-one-company-aims-reinvent-nuclear-reactor-and-save-warming-planet https://www.science.org/content/article/smaller-safer-cheape...
[2] https://www.nucnet.org/news/first-customer-has-set-lcoe-target-for-smr-of-usd55-mwh-says-co-founder-4-4-2021 https://www.nucnet.org/news/first-customer-has-set-lcoe-targ...
- ncmncm 4y agoNo. It is not. The US govt is massively subsidizing this whole venture, and none of that cost to taxpayers is figured in.
- ch4s3 4y agoYou’d need to compare to the subsidies and externalities of other power sources then right?
- pydry 4y agoSolar panel imports are even slapped with tarriffs. It's unlikely if you compared like for like it would come anywhere near the subsidies nuclear demands.
- ch4s3 4y agoInstallation is subsidized and you need to massively overbuild without storage or otherwise build storage.
- ncmncm 4y agoOverbuild of solar and wind has become cheap. But overbuild required is nowhere near that commonly assumed. Storage will of course be built too, at overwhelmingly less cost than nukes, and much, much faster. But, first, the generation capacity to charge it up from.
- stjohnswarts 4y agoThe cost of global warming destroying human civilization should be built into the actuarial costs here as well.