[mogadsheu]

This analysis is incredibly thorough and detailed, but I don’t think it answers the question it poses itself.

From my civil engineering and energy economics coursework, the one of the largest economic deterrents to nuclear power adoption was insurance: nobody would insure the construction of a plant, because a failure would bankrupt the insurance company.

To give the article credit, they do allude to catastrophic incidents and waste storage costs in near perpetuity, but don’t really mention insurance.

[ncmncm]

Instead, the insurance is always subsidized 100% by taxpayers, and left off the balance sheet to make nukes seem cheaper than they are.

Likewise, decommissioning cost.