ABSTRACT
The earlier costs, which were based on AGR data, were questioned by the MMC, who pointed to the sensitivity of the NEC to changes in input cost assumptions. They argued that some CEGB input costs were targets rather than best judgements, and that this gave answers too favourable to the nuclear case. This was seized on by some analysts7 who took the higher sensitivity analysis costs employed by MMC and linked them with their own assumptions about future real coal and nuclear fuel prices to arrive at ‘new’ comparative costs. The publication of the Sizewell figures,12 which take account of the points raised by the MMC, has overtaken these alternative calculations, which were themselves open to criticism.14 The evidence and cross-examination at the Sizewell Inquiry are looking into all aspects of costs in considerable detail.
