Personal tools

Argument: Nuclear power is relatively inexpensive

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting evidence

Patrick Moore, a prominent environmentalist and founding member of Greenpeace, "Going Nuclear A Green Makes the Case", Washington Post, 4/16/06 - "[Myth:] Nuclear energy is expensive. It is in fact one of the least expensive energy sources. In 2004, the average cost of producing nuclear energy in the United States was less than two cents per kilowatt-hour, comparable with coal and hydroelectric. Advances in technology will bring the cost down further in the future."

Pascal Zachary. "The case for nuclear power". SFGate. February 5, 2006: "So valuable are nuclear plants that none is for sale today. Indeed, scores of nuclear plants, once thought to be candidates for closure, are pursuing and receiving licenses to operate for at least an additional 20 years. So far, the NRC has extended the life of about 30 plants. Because these plants are fully bought and paid for (and even the money required to de-commission them sits safely in bank accounts), utilities are leaning on them, because they only incur operating expenses, guaranteeing that nuclear-generated electricity is by far the cheapest part of their energy mix.[1]

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits