>>216158931
The share of fuel expenditures on total costs varies largely between technologies: whereas nuclear plants are characterized by high investment but relatively low fuel costs, this ratio is typically reversed in the case of natural gas plants.
Low fuel costs have from the outset given nuclear energy an advantage compared with coal and gas-fired plants. Uranium, however, has to be processed, enriched and fabricated into fuel elements, accounting for about half of the total fuel cost. In the assessment of the economics of nuclear power, allowances must also be made for the management of radioactive used fuel and the ultimate disposal of this used fuel or the wastes separated from it. But even with these included, the total fuel costs of a nuclear power plant in the OECD are typically about one-third to one-half of those for a coal-fired plant and between one-quarter and one-fifth of those for a gas combined-cycle plant.
The OECD-NEA has calculated that the LCOE of nuclear plants are only slightly affected by a 50% change in fuel costs (in either direction) due to their high fixed-to-variable cost ratio. Comparatively, the economics of natural gas (CCGT) and coal plants are more sensitive to changes in fuel cost, with LCOEs changing by about 7% and 4% respectively for every 10% change of fuel price.
Uranium cost simply has little to no impact on nuclear energy prices because you are actually using a white man technology rather than relying on burning dead dinosaurs extracted by thirdies
10/24/2025, 10:15:42 PM
No.216155722
[Report]
>>216155998
>>216156473
>>216156923
>>216157172
>>216157366
>>216157953
>>216159156
>>216159962
>>216160525
>>216161117
