Quote Originally Posted by lucy View Post
You've been told wrong: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...DOE_report.gif. That's not yet including the money needed to eventually dismantle the nuclear power plant in fifty years. But then again, why think ahead, eh?
Looks like you're right. Like I said, it was a long time ago. But nuclear still outperforms coal 113.9 -136.2, unless you allow CO2 to escape.

But according to the article: "Capital costs (including waste disposal and decommissioning costs for nuclear energy)" so that's also factored in. I'm pretty sure the guy who told me those things back then was only talking about the actual production costs, based on fuel costs, and not including construction of decommissioning costs.