Originally Posted by faithful_servant

Nuclear is far too expensive. The only way it's ever been fiscally viable is by massive gov't subsidies. A lot of the nuclear power supporters like to cook the books on the energy cost for nuclear by ignoring the long term costs of a nuclear power plant and the massive back-end cost of building one. They like to talk about the low cost by only looking at the uranium mining/refining and production costs, but ignore the fact that w/o the gov't pouring money into the building and long term support costs, there's no way nuclear could be a fiscally viable source of power. Take a plant like Trojan in NW Oregon, it's completely shutdown, yet it will require a continual support staff for decades. Here's an article from 1993 when Trojan was being decomissioned:
Trojan Pay attention to the annual cost of a mothballed plant and the number of employees. This cost has gone up substantially (inflation) and the number of employees has remained pretty stable. It will be a continual drain on our tax dollars, since PGE cannot afford to keep support on it. The feds helped PGE build it and they (WE) will continue to help PGE support it.