According to various countries, nuclear energy is apparently not as expensive as is currently being discussed. Now 37 countries have questioned whether nuclear power is really that expensive. They will now expand more quickly. The investment bank Lazard is intended to support this view, is called es.
Is nuclear power “cheaper” than solar and wind energy under certain conditions?
EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has also commented on the significance or “importance” of nuclear power. Von der Leyen believes that nuclear power is the most important source of electricity production in the EU, accounting for a good 22% of the total. The head of the EU Commission also pointed out that this is also the second largest low-emission energy source in the world. The lowest-emission energy source is water.
Von der Leyen recommended that the 37 states “examine a possible extension of the service life” of the nuclear power plants and also push ahead with the construction of new nuclear power plants. In its opinion commentary, Die Welt says that, according to virtually all scenarios from the IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, nuclear power deserves to be multiplied if the world‘s net emissions are to be reduced to zero.
In total, a good 10% of the world‘s electricity needs would be produced in 413 nuclear power plants in a total of 31 countries. According to the opinion piece, this would have to “become significantly more”.
It is questionable whether the cost calculations are correct. Reference is made to individual projects that have become significantly too expensive. In fact, a calculation based on the “Levelized Cost of Energy” (LCOE) – according to which all costs are allocated to the generation of all kilowatt hours during the term – the investment bank Lazard has determined costs that are lower than for rooftop solar systems and depending on interest rates cheaper than “offshore wind power”.