Regional comparison of nuclear and fossil electric power generation costs

Conference · Sun Jan 01 04:00:00 EST 1984

OSTI ID:6556894

Bowers, H I

Nuclear's main disadvantages are its high capital investment cost and uncertainty in schedule compared with alternatives. Nuclear plant costs continue to rise whereas coal plant investment costs are staying relative steady. Based on average experience, nuclear capital investment costs are nearly double those of coal-fired generation plants. The capital investment cost disadvantage of nuclear is balanced by its fuel cost advantages. New base load nuclear power plants were projected to be competitive with coal-fired plants in most regions of the country. Nuclear power costs wre projected to be significantly less (10% or more) than coal-fired power costs in the South Atlantic region. Coal-fired plants were projected to have a significant economic advantage over nuclear plants in the Central and North Central regions. In the remaining seven regions, the levelized cost of power from either option was projected to be within 10%. Uncertainties in future costs of materials, services, and financing affect the relative economics of the nuclear and coal options significantly. 10 figures.

• Research Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (USA)
• DOE Contract Number: AC05-84OR21400
• OSTI ID: 6556894
• Report Number(s): CONF-840813-13; ON: DE84016696
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS
210800 -- Nuclear Power Plants-- Economics
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY
290200 -- Energy Planning & Policy-- Economics & Sociology
290600* -- Energy Planning & Policy-- Nuclear Energy
294000 -- Energy Planning & Policy-- Fossil Fuels
CAPITAL
COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS
COST
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
ECONOMICS
ELECTRIC POWER
FOSSIL-FUEL POWER PLANTS
INVESTMENT
NUCLEAR FACILITIES
NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS
POWER
POWER PLANTS
REGIONAL ANALYSIS
THERMAL POWER PLANTS