That's a Liberal Party think-tank supporting a hypocritical and ill-thought-out Liberal policy. Maybe people should read something from the actual domain exper

That's a Liberal Party think-tank supporting a hypocritical and ill-thought-out Liberal policy. Maybe people should read something from the actual domain experts instead? The latest CSIRO report specifically responded to the claims made about extending the time period. > CSIRO said accounting for a 60-year life reduced the costs of nuclear by about 9% compared with calculating over 30 years, but found other technologies such as solar and wind saw similar cost reductions of about 7% under the same approach. You yourself seem a bit confused about facts after using these sources. 1. Nuclear is not anywhere near the same price as solar. (I'm hoping you typo'd and were really trying to make the much saner but still wrong claim that renewables plus storage has costs comparable to nuclear which this document tries to claim) 2. It's not just the panel costs that have dropped, the delivered cost of solar energy has been falling. It dropped 12% in 2023 alone. This has lots of causes, like the safe and predictable success of solar allowing for lower interest rates and cheaper panels allowing for other assumptions to be rethought (e.g. ditch trackers that used to maximise output per panel and use the money and space saved to buy more panels).