Editing Nuclear power (section)

== Economics ==
{{Main|Economics of nuclear power plants|List of companies in the nuclear sector|cost of electricity by source}}
The economics of new nuclear power plants is a controversial subject and multi-billion-dollar investments depend on the choice of energy sources. Nuclear power plants typically have high capital costs for building the plant. For this reason, comparison with other power generation methods is strongly dependent on assumptions about construction timescales and capital financing for nuclear plants. Fuel costs account for about 30 percent of the operating costs, while prices are subject to the market.<ref name="cnnmoney">[https://money.cnn.com/2007/04/19/markets/uranium/index.htm ''What's behind the red-hot uranium boom.''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211129103837/https://money.cnn.com/2007/04/19/markets/uranium/index.htm|date=2021-11-29}}, CNN, 19 April 2007.</ref>

The high cost of construction is one of the biggest challenges for nuclear power plants. A new 1,100{{nbsp}}MW plant is estimated to cost between US$6 billion to US$9 billion.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Synapse Energy {{!}}|url=https://www.synapse-energy.com/|access-date=2020-12-29|website=www.synapse-energy.com|archive-date=2021-01-15|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210115164854/http://synapse-energy.com/|url-status=live}}</ref> Nuclear power cost trends show large disparity by nation, design, build rate and the establishment of familiarity in expertise. The only two nations for which data is available that saw cost decreases in the 2000s were India and South Korea.<ref name=Lovering2016>{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.enpol.2016.01.011 |title=Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors |journal=Energy Policy |volume=91 |pages=371–382 |year=2016 |last1=Lovering |first1=Jessica R. |last2=Yip |first2=Arthur |last3=Nordhaus |first3=Ted |doi-access=free |bibcode=2016EnPol..91..371L }}</ref>

Analysis of the economics of nuclear power must also take into account who bears the risks of future uncertainties. As of 2010, all operating nuclear power plants have been developed by state-owned or [[Regulated market|regulated]] [[electric utility]] monopolies.<ref name="ft-20100912">{{cite news |author=Crooks |first=Ed |date=2010-09-12 |title=Nuclear: New dawn now seems limited to the east |url=http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ad15fcfe-bc71-11df-a42b-00144feab49a.html |url-access=subscription |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221210/http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ad15fcfe-bc71-11df-a42b-00144feab49a.html |archive-date=2022-12-10 |access-date=2010-09-12 |newspaper=Financial Times |location=London, England}}</ref> Many countries have since liberalized the [[electricity market]] where these risks, and the risk of cheaper competitors emerging before capital costs are recovered, are borne by plant suppliers and operators rather than consumers, which leads to a significantly different evaluation of the economics of new nuclear power plants.<ref name=MIT-2003>{{Cite book |url=http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/ |title=The Future of Nuclear Power |publisher=[[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]] |year=2003 |isbn=978-0-615-12420-9 |access-date=2006-11-10 |archive-date=2017-05-18 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170518215841/http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

The [[levelized cost of electricity]] (LCOE) from a new nuclear power plant is estimated to be 69{{nbsp}}USD/MWh, according to an analysis by the [[International Energy Agency]] and the [[OECD]] [[Nuclear Energy Agency]]. This represents the median cost estimate for an nth-of-a-kind nuclear power plant to be completed in 2025, at a [[Discounting|discount rate]] of 7%. Nuclear power was found to be the least-cost option among [[Dispatchable generation|dispatchable technologies]].<ref name="IEA_LCOE_2020"/> [[Variable renewable energy|Variable renewables]] can generate cheaper electricity: the median cost of onshore wind power was estimated to be 50{{nbsp}}USD/MWh, and utility-scale solar power 56{{nbsp}}USD/MWh.<ref name="IEA_LCOE_2020"/> At the assumed CO<sub>2</sub> emission cost of 30{{nbsp}}USD/ton, power from coal (88{{nbsp}}USD/MWh) and gas (71{{nbsp}}USD/MWh) is more expensive than low-carbon technologies. Electricity from long-term operation of nuclear power plants by lifetime extension was found to be the least-cost option, at 32{{nbsp}}USD/MWh.<ref name="IEA_LCOE_2020">{{cite web |title=Projected Costs of Generating Electricity 2020 |date=9 December 2020 |url=https://www.iea.org/reports/projected-costs-of-generating-electricity-2020 |publisher=International Energy Agency & OECD Nuclear Energy Agency |access-date=12 December 2020 |archive-date=2 April 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220402003026/https://www.iea.org/reports/projected-costs-of-generating-electricity-2020 |url-status=live }}</ref>

Measures to [[Mitigation of global warming|mitigate global warming]], such as a [[carbon tax]] or [[carbon emissions trading]], may favor the economics of nuclear power.<ref>{{cite book |title=Update of the MIT 2003 Future of Nuclear Power |date=2009 |publisher=Massachusetts Institute of Technology |url=http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/pdf/nuclearpower-update2009.pdf |access-date=21 August 2018 |archive-date=3 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230203232427/http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/pdf/nuclearpower-update2009.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Splitting the cost |url=https://www.economist.com/britain/2009/11/12/splitting-the-cost |access-date=21 August 2018 |newspaper=The Economist |date=12 November 2009 |language=en |archive-date=21 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180821191849/https://www.economist.com/britain/2009/11/12/splitting-the-cost |url-status=live }}</ref> Extreme weather events, including events made more severe by climate change, are decreasing all energy source reliability including nuclear energy by a small degree, depending on location siting.<ref>{{cite news |title=Nuclear power's reliability is dropping as extreme weather increases |url=https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/07/climate-events-are-the-leading-cause-of-nuclear-power-outages/ |access-date=24 November 2021 |work=Ars Technica |date=24 July 2021 |language=en-us |archive-date=24 November 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211124190924/https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/07/climate-events-are-the-leading-cause-of-nuclear-power-outages/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ahmad |first1=Ali |title=Increase in frequency of nuclear power outages due to changing climate |journal=Nature Energy |date=July 2021 |volume=6 |issue=7 |pages=755–762 |doi=10.1038/s41560-021-00849-y |bibcode=2021NatEn...6..755A |s2cid=237818619 |language=en |issn=2058-7546}}</ref>

New [[small modular reactors]], such as those developed by [[NuScale Power]], are aimed at reducing the investment costs for new construction by making the reactors smaller and modular, so that they can be built in a factory.

Certain designs had considerable early positive economics, such as the [[CANDU]], which realized a much higher [[capacity factor]] and reliability when compared to generation II light water reactors up to the 1990s.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Canadian Nuclear FAQ – Section A: CANDU Technology |url=http://www.nuclearfaq.ca/cnf_sectionA.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131101054647/http://nuclearfaq.ca/cnf_sectionA.htm |archive-date=2013-11-01 |access-date=2019-08-05}}</ref>

Nuclear power plants, though capable of some grid-[[load following]], are typically run as much as possible to keep the cost of the generated electrical energy as low as possible, supplying mostly [[base-load]] electricity.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.oecd-nea.org/nea-news/2011/29-2/nea-news-29-2-load-following-e.pdf |title=Load-following with nuclear power plants |author=A. Lokhov |access-date=2016-03-12 |archive-date=2016-02-22 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160222051312/http://www.oecd-nea.org/nea-news/2011/29-2/nea-news-29-2-load-following-e.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> Due to the on-line refueling reactor design, [[PHWR]]s (of which the CANDU design is a part) continue to hold many world record positions for longest continual electricity generation, often over 800 days.<ref>{{Cite web | url=https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Indian-reactor-breaks-operating-record | title=Indian reactor breaks operating record | work=World Nuclear News | date=25 October 2018 | access-date=4 August 2019 | archive-date=4 August 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190804075915/https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Indian-reactor-breaks-operating-record | url-status=live }}</ref> The specific record as of 2019 is held by a PHWR at [[Kaiga Atomic Power Station]], generating electricity continuously for 962 days.<ref>{{cite web |title=Indian-Designed Nuclear Reactor Breaks Record for Continuous Operation |url=https://www.powermag.com/indian-designed-nuclear-reactor-breaks-record-for-continuous-operation/ |website=POWER Magazine |access-date=28 March 2019 |date=1 February 2019 |archive-date=28 March 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190328211427/https://www.powermag.com/indian-designed-nuclear-reactor-breaks-record-for-continuous-operation/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

Costs not considered in LCOE calculations include funds for research and development, and disasters (the Fukushima disaster is estimated to cost taxpayers ≈$187 billion).<ref name=guardian-20170130/> In some cases, Governments were found to force "consumers to pay upfront for potential cost overruns"<ref name="mil1"/> or subsidize uneconomic nuclear energy<ref>{{cite news |last1=Gardner |first1=Timothy |title=Illinois approves $700 million in subsidies to Exelon, prevents nuclear plant closures |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/illinois-senate-close-providing-lifeline-3-nuclear-power-plants-2021-09-13/ |access-date=28 November 2021 |work=Reuters |date=13 September 2021 |language=en |archive-date=3 November 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211103015537/https://www.reuters.com/world/us/illinois-senate-close-providing-lifeline-3-nuclear-power-plants-2021-09-13/ |url-status=live }}</ref> or be required to do so.<ref name="francere"/> Nuclear operators are liable to pay for the waste management in the European Union.<ref name="euwastecosts"/> In the U.S., the Congress reportedly decided 40 years ago that the nation, and not private companies, would be responsible for storing radioactive waste with taxpayers paying for the costs.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Wade |first1=Will |title=Americans are paying more than ever to store deadly nuclear waste |url=https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-radioactive-nuclear-waste-storage-20190614-story.html |access-date=28 November 2021 |work=Los Angeles Times |date=14 June 2019 |archive-date=28 November 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211128121638/https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-radioactive-nuclear-waste-storage-20190614-story.html |url-status=live }}</ref> The World Nuclear Waste Report 2019 found that "even in countries in which the polluter-pays-principle is a legal requirement, it is applied incompletely" and notes the case of the German [[Asse II mine|Asse II deep geological disposal facility]], where the retrieval of large amounts of waste has to be paid for by taxpayers.<ref>{{cite web |title=The World Nuclear Waste Report 2019 |url=https://www.boell.de/sites/default/files/2019-11/World_Nuclear_Waste_Report_2019_summary.pdf |access-date=28 November 2021 |archive-date=29 November 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211129140256/https://www.boell.de/sites/default/files/2019-11/World_Nuclear_Waste_Report_2019_summary.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> Similarly, other forms of energy, including fossil fuels and renewables, have a portion of their costs covered by governments.<ref>[https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/energy-subsidies.aspx Energy Subsidies] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211204180955/https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/energy-subsidies.aspx |date=2021-12-04 }}, World Nuclear Association, 2018.</ref>