edit: the following comment might just be misreading a weird graph that show the costs of one thing alongside the savings of another. Seems odd that their resu

edit: the following comment might just be misreading a weird graph that show the costs of one thing alongside the savings of another. Seems odd that their results suggest that continuing to run existing nuclear plants saves so much less compared with building new nuclear on a massive scale from 2002. Are the old nuclear plants really expensive to run or are these hypothetical new nuclear plants really cheap to build and run? Does this imply that closing the existing plants and replacing them with new builds would have saved them even more money?