Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

5 Financing Timelines
Pages 36-43

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 36...
... OPENING REMARKS Opening the session, Abramovitz said that building Georgia Power's Vogtle 3 and 4 led to significant construction efficiencies, a more mature supply chain, and a more experienced workforce. However, the high costs (even with generous loan financing)
From page 37...
... If stakeholders agree that increasing nuclear energy is key to energy security and decarbonization, he suggested that the federal government, perhaps with industry partners, needs to create those safety nets to enable the industry to progress from first-of-a-kind designs to scalable construction. In addition to federally backed financial incentives, Abramovitz said that it is important for utilities to be able to share the financial risks of building a new service for their customers, especially one that will take years, cost billions, and ultimately impact energy affordability for a ­utility's customers.
From page 38...
... Building on these points, Comello agreed that financial incentives like the IRA investment tax credit and the DOE Loan Programs Office are essential to making nuclear projects more cost-effective and attractive as investments. However, while the Vogtle plant experiences have yielded valuable data and learnings, he said that capital markets are not yet confident in the viability of building more nuclear plants, especially when it comes to building a single reactor or a first-of-a-kind design.
From page 39...
... However, he stressed that investors need the DOE Loan Programs Office and the IRA's investment tax credits, noting that estimates have suggested that losing those programs would nearly double the levelized costs of energy. "The number one priority for all of us who are pro-nuclear in this industry is to make clear to the current administration, who is supportive of nuclear, that these programs are absolutely non-negotiable," Krellenstein said.
From page 40...
... Small reactor designs may require less outside financing or have more pathways available, although he noted that the term "small" is relative, as even a small nuclear reactor can still be a very large project. ­Krellenstein noted that SMRs seem more likely to encounter problems such as cost overruns and underestimations, especially as their designs go from conceptual designs to detailed designs ready for construction.
From page 41...
... Most countries will need international support to build $10 billion reactors instead of solar panels, especially given the unproven cost-effectiveness of nuclear energy. He said that clear investment benefits, supportive government policies, and national security concerns should guide the international nuclear transition, which is critical to lowering energy prices and advancing decarbonization goals.
From page 42...
... Comello also said that the stalemate is ending. He pointed to multiple developments that are creating the momentum needed for nuclear ­projects to move forward: credible entities are narrowing the design port folio, states and localities are mobilizing to create new financial incen tives and support mechanisms that complement the DOE Loan Programs Office and investment tax credits, and hyperscalers are setting ambitious goals that they need nuclear energy to meet.
From page 43...
... Abramovitz replied that it may be, and while this should not be unlimited, it should be large enough to enable a project to continue in the face of unexpected challenges, achieve design maturity, and balance the high costs and risks the investors and utilities face.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.