Service test
Hold demand, cumulative carbon emissions, target year and reliability constant. Compare full system cost.
The common boundary
One portfolio may choose efficiency, wind, solar, hydro, grids, storage, flexible demand and other firm low-carbon resources. The second has the same choices plus new nuclear as an option, not a requirement. Both start with the same grid, demand, weather, import limits, price year and financing scenarios.
Keep four nuclear decisions separate
- 01
Continue an existing reactor
A safe lifetime extension uses an existing asset and can be cheaper and faster than any new plant. It needs its own case-by-case test.
- 02
Build one new large reactor
A single project carries site, design, delivery and financing risk before it produces electricity.
- 03
Build a standardised series
Repeat construction can improve performance, but the comparison must fund and schedule the whole programme.
- 04
Commit to an SMR programme
Factory and learning claims should be tested against several completed units, not a vendor forecast or one pilot.
Two useful tests
Budget test
Hold budget, target year and reliability constant. Compare low-carbon electricity delivered and cumulative emissions avoided.
What the total must include
- Generation construction, operation, fuel, decommissioning and waste
- Financing, construction delay and overrun risk
- Networks, interconnectors and grid services
- Storage, demand flexibility and reserve capacity
- Curtailment, imports and imported-power emissions
- Planned outages, unexpected failures and delivery after the target year
Test difficult years
Run several historical weather years and test prolonged low wind and solar output, drought, heat, high demand, restricted imports, fuel-price shocks, correlated reactor outages and construction delay. Publish ranges, not only the average case.