Nuclear Power vs. Other Technologies
To properly compare any two generation sources, it's important to look at the cost to build - as well as the cost to operate - the plant over its entire life.
Both nuclear and coal plants have higher construction costs, but lower operating and fuel costs.
Natural Gas vs. Nuclear
- Natural gas plants are less expensive to build but much more expensive to operate because of their high fuel costs.
- Eighty percent of the overall cost to produce a kilowatt-hour from a natural gas plant is the cost of the fuel, while fuel represents only about 10 percent of the overall cost to produce a kilowatt-hour from nuclear plants.
- The price of natural gas increased more than 400 percent from 2002 through the end of June 2008 (before moderating in July and August 2008).
- Most U.S. utilities have added only natural gas-fueled power plants in the past 15 years.
- Even with the potential addition of new nuclear and coal-fueled plants in the next decade, this trend toward more natural gas-fueled plants will continue for the next several years.
Coal vs. Nuclear
- The price of coal has more than doubled in the past year.
- The United States Congress is considering Carbon Tax legislation that would add billions of dollars to the prices of fossil fuels in the United States.
- The capital costs of nuclear plants are typically greater than the cost of building coal-fueled plants - but fuel costs for nuclear plants are typically only half to one-third the cost of fuel for coal.
- The fuel savings for nuclear are seen over the life of the plant, which is expected to be around 60 years.
- This full cost evaluation over the life of the plant is what makes nuclear attractive, even with a higher initial cost to build.
