MIKHAIL CHUDAKOV | THE INTERVIEW


for solar panels, and this has created the myth that they are the cheapest. Actually, they are not the cheapest if you take into account all of these things. The decommissioning for nuclear power is already included, for the new designs and the old, in the cost per kilowatt hour. I’m not sure about renewable energy sources. We can debate this. A couple of years ago, I participated in the energy


week conference in Tashkent. A high level representative of the International Renewable Energy Agency spoke about more than 500 GW of installed green renewable capacity for the previous year and mentioned that nuclear power was only 5 GW. When he showed the slides, I saw that hydro was a small amount, wind was also not very much, and the biggest component was photovoltaic solar PV. When it was my turn to talk, I showed that the load


factor or capacity factor for nuclear power reactors is 94% reducing the 5 GW to 4.7 GW For the solar PV it was 23% – in reality, even less, but let’s assume that it was a quarter. One quarter of 500 GW is 125 GW. Then there is a ratio used by the International Energy


Agency of energy return to energy invested. For nuclear power it’s the biggest. It’s 75–80 times because of the long lifetime and other factors. For solar PV it’s one point six times without batteries. So one point six times 125 GW is around 200 GW while our 5 GW multiplied by 80 is close to 400 GW. So I showed that our 5 GW in reality creates twice as much energy as their 500 GW. This is a simple calculation when we are talking about the overall cost per kilowatt hour. Energy security is national security. If you want a


sustainable, reliable, safe source of energy with a predictable price, even for 100 years you need the nuclear power. In terms of the cost per kilowatt hour, nuclear fuel accounts for no more than only about 7% to 10%, so if the price increases, it will not be significant. For coal and gas, fuel represents about 70% and this for sure will be increasing. Nuclear has a lot of pluses including the predictable cost per kilowatt hour.


NEI: A lot of countries, including developed countries, are finding it really hard to finance nuclear power because they are trying to do it privately, using market principles. Yes, privately, of course, it’s very difficult. If I had a private bank, probably I also would never invest a big amount to take receive revenue in 20 years, no. Nuclear power is a governmental matter. It should be supported by the government. If, in the country, the top leadership is not supportive, you cannot have nuclear power there. This is a matter not only of up-front investment, but of safety, the education of the staff, governmental control, and other things. It is very difficult for private companies to be involved in nuclear.


NEI: So what about developing countries? Some developing countries, of course, don’t need a big source of energy because their infrastructure is not adequate. Even if they could find the money, the condition of their grid may not be suitable as well as the other areas that we have highlighted when helping countries, member states, create the necessary infrastructure. They are not prepared for a large energy source. This is why we are talking a lot now about the small modular reactors (SMRs) that are supposed to be cheaper in terms of up-front investment, with faster modular construction, smaller emergency zones and other things. Already private companies are showing interest in creating these energy sources and there are different schemes and different formats of financing now being considered. Private banks and established banks have recently declared that they are ready to invest in nuclear power. Before that it was excluded. Private companies seeking a predictable cost of electricity for many years to come are now ready to invest. And it is not just developing countries that are


interested in SMRs. For example, we have had discussions with delegations from Singapore. They are looking for different sources of energy. They currently have 13 GW of installed capacity but no


www.neimagazine.com | January 2026 | 31


Above: Singapore is just one of the many nations interested in SMRs and floating NPPs.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45