Price tag for new nuclear power in Sweden $38 billion, commission says

20 comments

1. > Sweden’s plans to rapidly expand nuclear power are likely to cost around 400 billion crowns ($38 billion) and should be financed by mix of government loans and price guarantees, a government commission recommended on Monday.
   >
   The commission proposed a programme of four or five new nuclear power plants with 4,000-6,000 MW of installed capacity in order to make the programme cost-effective.
   >
   >The state should lend nuclear companies 75% of the cost of building power plants with the owners contributing 25%. The commission said the government should guarantee an electricity price of around 80 ore/Kwh to investors over 40 years.

   …

   > The government aims for 2,500 MW of new nuclear power by 2035 – the equivalent of 2 new reactors. By 2045, the government has said it wants 10 new reactors.

2. >The government aims for 2,500 MW of new nuclear power by 2035 – the equivalent of 2 new reactors. By 2045, the government has said it wants 10 new reactors.

   Just to put this into perspective.

   At a capacity factor of 90% that’s around 19.7 TWh of electricity per year that you can expect in a decade (if they are on time lol).

   Germany build around 20 TWh of solar and wind power last year alone (10% capacity factor solar / 25% capacity factor wind).

3. That’s not bad for 5 nuclear plants, nuclear is expensive at the start but upkeep and fuel for its 40 to 60 year life span are cheap.

4. Statistically the construction of a nuclear plant is under estimated in both cost and time needed to build. Let’s hope that statistics will fail us this time.

5. What a steal…

6. Insanity on Sweden’s part given the moves to green and sustainable energy sources.

7. It’s a promise to secure loans up to 300b sek. Before people start screaming expensive nuclear, the Swedish government gave a similar secure loan deal to wind and solar for up to 250b

8. That’s a fair few bob

9. It’s a shame they are not looking at the new plants and trying to at least build one of the SMRs that are being shopped around.

10. 38 Billion seems excessive for a project that won’t come to fruition for a long time. Afaik Sweden is ranked one of the highest in wind power, why not just continue to invest in that? Unless I’m wrong and they are but it’s not enough.

11. Electricity is the most important part for a civilisation to function. Without it we wont have anything, no food, heat, cant pay anything. Everything will quickly fall a part.

    I dont mind Sweden spend a lot of money on this when its so necessary. To have something stable and clean.

    Only wind and solar required battery backup. Huge amount of it battery and space and it wont be cheap or clean. And needs to be replaced after 10-15years

12. I don’t care about the price, really. As long as the price isn’t completely unreasonable, what matters is emissions and how quickly they can be cut. If Sweden can get the reactors online very quickly, it is worth it even if the price is fairly high. But if the price is fairly high and it takes a long time, then it is pointless and the effort and money would’ve been better spent on renewable energy. I feel geothermal especially is underrated as a fairly expensive but clean and reliable power generation.

13. Enough with the “Nuclear takes long to build” BS.
    Everywhere else but the west nuclear projects are built on time and budget.
    Places like the Emirates, South Korea, China, Russia, Turkey, Bangladesh can manage those projects no problem.
    It’s just a matter of political will, nothing more.
    Good for Sweden! The More nuclear building the better!

14. This means 80-100 billion.

15. Critics might call it a costly gamble but hey, if nuclear power can pull off a win, Sweden might just be the power couple of the green energy world

16. What a scam

17. No one covering the risk and what a disastrous accident could bring? There is no way a business case can carry the funding for this so it will still be the state taking care of this. Germany, Denmark etc does not take the risk so why should we?

18. The average price has been a quarter of the expected nuclear minimum for the whole summer, so a little more wind and solar should bring it to zero. Where is the benefit for Sweden?

19. You can buy so many solar panels and land from that money that you could have the same power output just from star shimmer and moonlight in the night. 

    Disclaimer, I didn’t do the math, but it seems realistic. Let’s do the math.

20. I’m taking notes for 250,000 Philippine dollars.

    Words