The only thing more expensive than nuclear — in these stats at least — is small-scale solar installations.
Btw, this widespread (but wrong) belief that nuclear is cheap stems from the fact that a lot of countries heavily subsidized their nuclear industry in order to gain know-how and/or materials for atomic weapon production. It's not even cost-covering at current energy prices without those subsidies.
Nuclear power is just too expensive. Look at France - the have 80% or so nuclear and all of their power companies run at a loss and have to be subsidized.
Meanwhile in Germany wind and solar make a pretty good complement and are cheaper, even with storage included, which is mostly provided by Switzerland and Austria.
And fund the plants from budget, not commercial debt.
> "Governments can borrow much more cheaply that private companies and that lower cost of borrowing can drastically reduce the ultimate cost. Hinkley Point C would have been roughly half the cost if the government had been borrowing the money to build it at 2%, rather than EDF's cost of capital, which was 9%."
The only thing more expensive than nuclear — in these stats at least — is small-scale solar installations.
Btw, this widespread (but wrong) belief that nuclear is cheap stems from the fact that a lot of countries heavily subsidized their nuclear industry in order to gain know-how and/or materials for atomic weapon production. It's not even cost-covering at current energy prices without those subsidies.