This particular study is out of Australia and is a very well organized and peer reviewed piece of work. The study compares prices of legitimate sources of power generation in a world where carbon output has a fungible price associated with it.

Now I know that people come down on both sides of the climate change debate and I am not looking to try and change anyone’s opinion here in this blog. What I am observing, however, is that climate change regulation or no climate change regulation, nuclear power still comes in as the most cost effective means of power generation. This been proven in so many studies that they are too numerous to list here.

While it is true that some studies claim that windpower and/or solar power are cheaper than nuclear these studies are very misleading. Windpower is not free unless the wind turbines magically appear out of nowhere (with no money being borrowed to build them) and magically never need repair or maintenance. These studies also leave out the fact that when the wind output drops that power needs to be purchased on the spot market (which is tantamount to heating your house by burning $20 bills).

Solar Power has the same problems with the additional complication that no photovoltaic (PV) cell has yet been produced that will generate as much power in its usable lifetime as it consumed to be produced. Who cares if we lose a dollar on every unit we sell, we’ll make it up in volume.

So let’s get back to real-world economics. In a world with no carbon regulation nuclear is least expensive and in a world with carbon regulation the other forms of generation put nuclear so far ahead that fossil-fueled generation becomes practically unrealistic.

Regardless of where you come down on the climate change debate, there is one fundamental truth that no thinking person can deny and that is the fact that the cost of energy will always be inseparable from the health of any economy. If the cost of energy to businesses decreases the economy improves because the businesses can make larger investments in people, technology, and other assets. If the cost of energy to the consumer decreases the economy improves because consumers will buy more goods and services.

I really liked this study. If you would like to read it just click here: http://theenergycollective.com/barrybrook/47728/nuclear-least-cost-low-carbon-baseload-power-source