Interesting analysis by Tristan Edis on what he calls the “accounting tricks” behind the L/NP’s claim their nuclear plan is cheaper than AEMO’s Step Change scenario:
1) Assume a cost for nuclear power plants ~50% of they have actually cost to build (1/5)
https://reneweconomy.com.au/the-four-accounting-tricks-behind-peter-duttons-nuclear-cost-claims/
1) Assume a cost for nuclear power plants ~50% of they have actually cost to build (1/5)
https://reneweconomy.com.au/the-four-accounting-tricks-behind-peter-duttons-nuclear-cost-claims/
Comments
3) Push most of the costs of replacing old coal power stations outside the modelling period
4) Ignore the costs from higher GHG emissions (2/5)
a) all of these values are estimates of marginal abatement costs, not "damage costs" as Tristan writes.
b) NSW in December published updated "NSW carbon values" for gov't economic analysis. Worth a look: they're higher again than IA's https://www.treasury.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-12/20241220-NSW-Carbon-Values-Report.pdf (6/5)