Current Access Level “I” – ID Only: CUID holders and approved guests only. Building Access: Normal building operating hours with exceptions. Read more about the campus status level system and campus access information. See the latest updates to the community regarding campus planning.
Get the latest as our experts share their insights on global energy policy.
This year’s Conference of the Parties (COP-29) broke new ground with the Baku Initiative for Climate Finance, Investment, and Trade (BICFIT)—the first high-profile COP initiative to place trade...
Hear in-depth conversations with the world’s top energy and climate leaders from government, business, academia, and civil society.
This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Cheryl LaFleur and David Hill about the incoming Trump administration, its impact on FERC, and the status of permitting reform measures.
Find out more about our upcoming and past events.
Please join the Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP) at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs for a special webinar "Can AI Help Reduce Emissions of...
Reports by Matt Bowen, Emeka Ochu & James Glynn • December 07, 2023
This report represents the research and views of the author. It does not necessarily represent the views of the Center on Global Energy Policy. The piece may be subject to further revision. Contributions to SIPA for the benefit of CGEP are general use gifts, which gives the Center discretion in how it allocates these funds. Rare cases of sponsored projects are clearly indicated.
For a full list of financial supporters of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University SIPA, please visit our website at Our Partners. See below a list of members that are currently in CGEP’s Visionary Annual Circle. This list is updated periodically.
Corporate Partnerships
Occidental Petroleum Corporation
Tellurian Inc
Foundations and Individual Donors
Anonymous
Anonymous
the bedari collective
Jay Bernstein
Breakthrough Energy LLC
Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (CIFF) Arjun Murti
Ray Rothrock
Kimberly and Scott Sheffield
Models that run decarbonization scenarios to meet mid-century goals for mitigating climate change almost always include a significant role for nuclear energy. The source’s projected level of deployment, however, remains uncertain, largely due to a wide range of estimated costs for new builds. Other factors that make it hard to gauge nuclear’s portion of the future energy mix include whether policies advancing low-carbon technologies will be enacted, the degree of public support for transmission siting and available low-carbon energy sources, whether new reactor technologies and fuels will change the investment equation, and how quickly “competitor” sources such as carbon capture and sequestration, renewables, and storage reduce costs.
This report, part of ongoing research into nuclear energy at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University SIPA, examines the economics of new nuclear facilities for electricity generation—whether building them out makes sense financially as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as power demand grows across the globe. Insights into costs can be gleaned by reviewing the history of construction delays and cost overruns in the United States, international experiences that have fared better and worse, and studies that model a transitioning energy system. Studies reviewed in this report estimate new US reactor costs generally ranging from $3,000/kilowatt (kW) to $6,200/kW based on a variety of reactor designs and cost reduction curves assumed for subsequent years. Internationally, new reactor costs vary significantly by country, depending in part upon factors such as the cost of labor and whether projects involve multiple reactor builds (with attendant efficiencies in manufacturing and construction).
Additional findings from this report include the following:
Microsoft’s plan to restart Three Mile Island points to the way forward.
Nuclear power is being weighed in energy transition plans around the world, as countries seek to replace fossil fuels with low-carbon alternatives while also meeting growing energy demand and maintaining reliability and affordability.
While the United States (US) has facilities that can and do dispose of most low-level nuclear waste (LLW), it does not yet have a viable disposal pathway for two categories of waste: so-called greater-than-class-c (GTCC) nuclear waste, and nuclear waste with characteristics similar to it, or “GTCC-like.”
Full report
Reports by Matt Bowen, Emeka Ochu & James Glynn • December 07, 2023