It is true that the cost of building a nuclear power plant to produce the same amount of electricity as a coal-burning plant, or even of a gas plant, could be prohibitive. But that is not the case for a commercial nuclear plant and commercial nuclear energy is no less cost effective than conventional energy. The problem with commercial nuclear energy is cost, but it is not the problem with conventional energy energy, nor is it the problem with nuclear energy.
The real problem with the construction cost of a nuclear power station is that it is simply too expensive. For one thing, building a nuclear power plant takes a lot of time and money. The costs for a nuclear power plant are estimated to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars, yet nuclear energy actually costs far less to build than coal-fired or gas-fired energy. For example, one study published last year stated that the fuel costs of a natural gas plant of the type that the Fukushima plant is based on are less than $2 per barrel. By comparison, the costs of building a Nuclear Power Plant are estimated to be roughly $10 billion and the costs of the associated infrastructure, including the power station itself, are estimated to be about $100 billion. That means that, for a nuclear power plant, you need to spend more than $10,000,000 more than the fuel that you are burning would buy today in that same plant. So the problem with the money spent to build a new nuclear plant has to do with the construction of the nuclear plant itself.
Another problem with the construction costs of building a nuclear power plant is waste. The total weight of waste from any nuclear power plant is estimated to be 3-7 billion lb, based on the most recent information from the US Bureau of Reclamation published in 2011. One of the best things about the Fukushima nuclear plant is that it has a very low total amount of nuclear waste, about 500 tons. But that has not stopped the world’s nuclear power companies from investing millions of dollars building a waste incinerator to dispose of the waste from a nuclear fuel cycle, and it is estimated that these plants will spend at least $20 billion. These estimates do not include the costs for the waste itself (i.e., the radioactive material used in the nuclear fuel cycle) or for the disposal of this spent nuclear fuel.
It’s important to realize that the construction cost of a nuclear power plant doesn’t equal the cost of an alternative energy source. That isn’t a matter of being more expensive,
free energy magnetic motors pdf drive books, best free energy device commercially available submarine crab, tesla’s free energy devices, free energy devices images, standard change in gibbs free energy equation temperature