Nuclear Energy

Advanced Boiling Water Reactors (ABWR) developed in Japan. clxxxi By the end of 2009, four
ABWRs were in service and two under construction in Taiwan. Total construction costs for the first
two Japanese units were reported to be $3,236/kW for the first unit in 1997 dollars and about
$2,800/kW for the second. These costs are well above the forecast range. These units have also
suffered design problems in the turbine, implying that a new turbine design will be required, which
might take several years. clxxxii While no Generation III+ reactor has ever been built; only one
Generation III+ reactor design is under construction, Areva’s EPR, one at Olkiluoto in Finland, one
at Flamanville in France, and two in Taishan in China. Obviously, nothing is known about what
will be the operating cost of this design; while all that we know about its construction costs is that
these have sharply escalated as work has progressed (see below).
Estimates by Independent Institutions
Over the past decade many independent institutions have conducted systematic and detailed
studies of nuclear plant costs, and their assessments contradict the claims of the nuclear industry.
We give below the results of some of these studies, done by well-respected bodies.
A report from the New Economics Foundation, an independent British think tank founded in
1986 by the leaders of The Other Economic Summit (TOES), titled “Mirage and Oasis: Energy
Choices in an Age of Global Warming” concluded that the cost of nuclear power has been
underestimated by almost a factor of three. clxxxiii Another study by the US Department of Energy's
(DOE) Energy Information Administration concluded that nuclear power is more costly than natural
gas and coal plants. clxxxiv A University of Chicago study in 2004 also came to the same
conclusion. clxxxv
In May 2006, in response to the so-called ‘Nuclear Renaissance’, the Centre for
International Governance Innovation based in Canada, (an independent think tank led by a group of
distinguished academics and supported by the Government of Canada) initiated the ‘Nuclear Energy
Futures Project’ to investigate the likely size, shape and nature of the purported nuclear energy
revival to 2030. Its report in February 2010 concluded that one of the important factors
constraining the expansion of nuclear energy was its economics: “The economics are profoundly
unfavourable and are getting worse. This will persist unless governments provide greater
incentives...” clxxxvi
MIT Updated Study 2009
Probably the most sophisticated and widely cited study on the economics of nuclear power
is a 2003 study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (a pro-nuclear institution) titled
“Future of Nuclear Power”, which was updated in 2009 to take into consideration the sharp increase
in construction costs of nuclear as well as coal and gas fired power plants. This study concluded that
the “levelised” cost of electricity clxxxvii generated by a new nuclear power plant is about 30-35%
higher than the cost of electricity from a coal fired or combined cycle gas turbine plant. clxxxviii
58