This will be used out of context to justify deployment of nuclear in Australia, despite the fact the US has an active industry, experience of build and is therefore in late stage technology curve for cost.
Australia has one research swimming pool reactor, no power reactors, and nuclear power is banned in statute at state and federal level. To believe the cost of deployment here in time or money sense is low because "nuclear is back" in America is wishful thinking. But I fully expect to see the arguments rehearsed.
At best this will push out cost of construction down to its lower side estimates. It won't alter the inevitable planning, approval, legislative and protest bound delays which continue to dog deployment of nuclear power, across a time of continued improvement in levelled cost of energy for wind, battery and solar as well as the build out of pumped hydro.
By the time nuclear could be deployed here, the amount of baseload it could price into will be far smaller and the demand based case will be even smaller than at present.
Australia has one research swimming pool reactor, no power reactors, and nuclear power is banned in statute at state and federal level. To believe the cost of deployment here in time or money sense is low because "nuclear is back" in America is wishful thinking. But I fully expect to see the arguments rehearsed.
At best this will push out cost of construction down to its lower side estimates. It won't alter the inevitable planning, approval, legislative and protest bound delays which continue to dog deployment of nuclear power, across a time of continued improvement in levelled cost of energy for wind, battery and solar as well as the build out of pumped hydro.
By the time nuclear could be deployed here, the amount of baseload it could price into will be far smaller and the demand based case will be even smaller than at present.