Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by pintxo 1392 days ago
I am curious, was there ever a time were insurance companies did offer risk insurance for nuclear power plants? If not, then nuclear has been killed by it's risk profile.
2 comments

Nuclear plants tend to be underinsured; the bulk of the financial burden of a cleanup after a potential accident will be carried by tax payers. I am not sure if that is true everywhere, but at least in the US (the federal government takes over after the first $15 bn) and parts of Europe. Japan technically not, but practically yes. [0][1][2]

It gets even trickier with plants bordering other countries.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuclear... [1]: https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=51672335&itype=CMS... [2]: https://theconversation.com/five-years-after-fukushima-there... | https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/04/08/national/fukush...

Working for an insurance company, I feel really uncomfortable with that.

Insurance prefers short policy durations: a year long, preferably.

Anything longer and the level of uncertainty becomes massive.

For an oil well, a year long policy is fine. Nuclear requires decades.