Originally Posted by A_Wanderer
That article was discussing Australia, a country endowed with both hot rocks and an overabundance of sunlight with a small population, the economics of nuclear power plants would be different in other places and nuclear mustn't be taken off the table.
True, but his claim wasn't very geographically specific. He's just claiming the cost difference is "enourmous". And everything I've found doesn't lead to such a statement... I chose that article because it was pretty straight forward without too much blatant bias.