I’d just like to add a few other points to Rod Adam’s excellent analysis
The naive NCWarn paper references nuclear plant cost data that are neither accurate nor representative of what the plants will cost. The fact is that plants in progress are still refining their contracts, terms and supplier costs to get them into the lowest range possible with fair risk assumption by owner and EPC (Engineering-Procurement-Construction) contractors. The information showing nuclear costs is misleading, in that it includes owner costs in addition to the nuclear plant, which for some projects include large transmission build-outs.
Additionally their “nuclear into solar” replacement assumptions are generically wrong because renewables will not be applicable to all areas that are in need of and are now planning baseload nuclear – like Florida and other Southeastern states, and the Mid-Atlantic region!
It is interesting to watch the “Interventionistas” play their cards, relying on unvalidated information from Research Fellow (albeit “Senior”!) Mr. Cooper in Vermont for supposed “facts” on an industry he has no primary experience in or knowledge of. Our sustainable economic future depends on accurate energy facts, data and science, not more myth, lore and legend.