The debate on moving towards sustainable energy brings up the same old tired myth of nuclear power being cheaper than the alternatives like solar and wind. This is not the case in Australia, though. This GenCost report, a collaboration between CSIRO and AEMO, breaks down the cost of energy into detailed analysis showing nuclear is not competitive. Here is why renewable will continue to be the most economical for Australia’s future energy.
The GenCost Report: A Detailed Analysis
The GenCost report provides a basis for the comparison of LCOE by technology. The LCOE is given as the average cost per MWh of electricity produced over the lifetime of an energy facility: construction, operational, and maintenance costs. With this metric, one can easily compare different energy sources.
Based on projects whose start date falls before 2040, here are the estimates for the given LCOE ranges in the GenCost report:
- Solar PV: $22 to $53 per MWh
- Wind: $45 to $78 per MWh
- Nuclear: $145 to $238 per MWh
These values indicate that nuclear is not only more expensive but also significantly less competitive compared to both solar and wind. This gap becomes even more skewed in the face of Australia’s wealth of natural resources and the pace of technological advances in the renewable energy field.
Why Nuclear Fails
High Capital Costs
High initial investment and capital requirements also make nuclear energy expensive. For a nuclear power plant, the venture will be capital intensive because of specialized materials, stringent safety requirements, and regulatory requirements. In Australia, which doesn’t have infrastructure for nuclear-related activities, this is likely to increase in cost because they would have to develop supply chains, train the personnel, and establish new frameworks for regulation.
Long Development Timelines
Nuclear power plants take decades to plan, approve, and construct. Even under the most optimistic of scenarios, a new nuclear plant in Australia would likely not be in operation until the 2040s or later, making its ability to contribute meaningfully to Australia’s 2050 net-zero emissions target doubtful. In contrast, solar and wind projects can be deployed within a few years and provide immediate benefits.
Decommissioning and Waste Management
Nuclear energy comes with high cost items in decommissioning at the end of a reactor’s life cycle and waste management, which entails long-term liabilities both financially and to the environment. This alone reduces its appeal compared with renewable sources of energy.
Comparative Cost Viability
Advantages of Solar and Wind
It is worth mentioning that the plummeting costs of solar PV and wind energy are a game-changer. As Australia has favorable geography, with strong solar irradiation and constant winds, and there have been continuous technological advancements with economies of scale, these sources of renewable energy are the cheapest for new projects.
Rapid Deployment
Unlike nuclear power, renewable energy projects can be accelerated to respond more rapidly to energy needs and climate objectives. The rapidity required is necessary to fulfill Australia’s commitment under the Paris Agreement as well as a net-zero economy.
Least Harmed to the Environment
Solar and wind energy have extremely low greenhouse gas emissions during operation and very little overall environmental impact. They also have none of the risks of nuclear accidents and the challenging task of managing radioactive waste.
Overcoming Common Misconceptions
The main advantage of nuclear power is that it gives baseload power, whereas the energy produced by solar and wind is intermittent. With improvements in energy storage and grid management technologies, these issues are becoming relatively less serious. Large-scale battery storage systems, pumped hydro, and smart grid technologies make energy supply reliable even with high penetration of renewables.
The third reason is that nuclear energy is a complement to Australia’s diverse energy mix. While diversification is good, it must also be economically sound. Nuclear power has high costs and long lead times; thus, geothermal and biomass can easily become alternative supporting technologies.
The myth that nuclear energy will be cheaper than solar and wind finds no support in the evidence of the GenCost report. In Australia, renewable sources not only offer the cheapest cost but are also more aligned with the climate goals and resources available to the country. Given that peak solar PV can hit $22 per MWh, and wind reaches as high as $45 per MWh, the economic case for renewables is outright.
The rapid-deployment capabilities make renewables the solution most likely to best match Australia’s supply and demand within its net-zero targets. Nuclear power does have a certain role in another context, yet it is by no means cheap or practical to implement in the Australian context.
The potential of solar, wind, and other complementary technologies could enable Australia to transition into a future with sustainable, affordable, and reliable energy supplies without the burden of nuclear economic and environmental implications.
We design and manufacture high-quality switchboards. Contact us today to discuss your requirements and get started!