As Plantagenet notes with sarcasm: "Nuclear spruikers know all about security."

To add to this they also know all about public risk insurance.

They're just too coy to talk about it.

Happy to let the mug public pick up that tab.

EmperorJulian,

You display your ignorance - probably a result of reading only anti-nuke propaganda.

Read about the US Price-Anderson Act here: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/nuclear-insurance.html

The fact is only nuclear would be economically viable if all technologies had to insure for the fatalities they cause. To understand this let’s estimate how much would society need to subsidise nuclear, or penalize other electricity generators, to equalize the compensation costs so all technologies pay for the fatalities they cause? Viewed another way, how much would we need to subsidise nuclear to reward the comparatively higher safety of nuclear power?

A rough calculation shows we should subsidise nuclear by $140/MWh to substitute for coal-fired generation and $37/MWh to substitute for gas fired generation in the USA (it’s different in each country). In that case, consumers should be paid around $50/MWh to consume nuclear generated electricity.

See here for the basis of estimate: https://judithcurry.com/2016/01/19/is-nuclear-the-cheapest-way-to-decarbonize-electricity/#comment-759092

Inputs used for the estimate:

1. Value of a Statistical Life (VSL) in USA = $9.4 million (2015, https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/VSL2015_0.pdf )

2. Fatalities per TWh (Source Forbes http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/06/deaths-by-energy-source-in-forbes.html )

Coal electricity, world avg. = 60 (50% of electricity)
Coal electricity, China = 90
Coal, U.S. = 15 (44% U.S. electricity)
Natural Gas = 4 (20% global electricity)
Solar (rooftop) = 0.44 (0.2% global electricity)
Wind = 0.15 (1.6% global electricity)
Hydro, world avg. = 1.4 (15% global electricity)
Nuclear, world avg. = 0.09 (12% global electricity w/Chern&Fukush)

Results:

If each technology was required to pay insurance or compensation for the annual cost of fatalities caused by that technology, the amounts they would have to pay per MWh are:

Technology $/MWh
Coal 141
Nat gas 38
Hydro 13
Solar 4
Nuclear 1

Or, if each technology is not penalized for the fatalities it causes, society should subsidise nuclear $140/MWh to substitute for coal and $37/MWh to substitute for natural gas generation.

Thanks EJ

Nuclear spruikers indeed minimize the huge problem of nuclear public risk insurance.

Despite its private enterprise facade, when huge bills need paying nuclear power becomes a government (taxpayer funded) business.

New reactors (even you beaut "cheap and safe" technologies) can't be built without government financial and sales guarantees.

New reactors need a shield from liabilities in case of accident. Normal business concepts don’t work here. And the insurance can't get priced into the nuclear cost-benefit analysis.

If a nuclear clean up insurance bill was paid by private industry, it would rapidly bankrupt the reactor operating company.

So the residents of Adelaide, Melbourne, North Sydney or Byron Bay will pay for those "act of God" nuclear events or insider mistakes.

Islamic terrorists are also beginning to notice vulnerabilities. Even remote threats worry if "nuclear" is in the headline. Maybe "nuclear" attracts bad associations - who knows.

In that regard see March 22, 2016 news “BREAKING: Belgian nuclear power plants evacuated” after terror attacks — Multiple reactor sites cleared “amid heightened fears of another attack”

http://enenews.com/breaking-belgian-nuclear-power-plants-evacuated-after-terror-attacks-multiple-reactor-sites-cleared-amid-heightened-fears-another-attack-military-armed-police-scene-capital-city-lockdown-afte which includes:

Reuters, Mar 22, 2016: Belgium’s Tihange nuclear power plant evacuated-VTM — Belgium’s Tihange nuclear power plant has been evacuated, public broadcaster VTM said without giving further details. Tihange could not immediately be reached for comment. “The police have evacuated the Tihange nuclear station,” VTM said, citing police sources.

Plantagenet,

You forgot the anti aircraft gun at the power stations and the camps at Nauru for demonstrators.

You can always count on Greenies for baseless fear mongering.

Giday Shadow Minny

If I'm a Greenie I'd think Sarah Hanson-Young (girl with kaleidoscope eyes) http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/image/4355814-3x4-700x933.jpg

would use her real biceps to chuck me out of The Party.

A recent exhibit of my craft:

http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2016/03/the-future-french-ssn-and-ssbn-programs.html

Cheers

Pete

plantagenet,

The fact you are so irrational, emotional, have a closed mind and intellectually dishonest
https://judithcurry.com/2013/04/20/10-signs-of-intellectual-honesty/
when discussing nuclear power, suggests you could not be trusted on anything. Your comments come across to me as an example of a real denier. If you want to change the impression you give, you might want to consider this:
"A flowchart to help you determine if you’re having a rational discussion"
http://twentytwowords.com/a-flowchart-to-help-you-determine-if-youre-having-a-rational-discussion/