references.bib

@article{hultmanWhatHistoryCan2007,
  title = {What {{History Can Teach Us About}} the {{Future Costs}} of {{U}}.{{S}}. {{Nuclear Power}}},
  author = {Hultman, Nathan E. and Koomey, Jonathan G. and Kammen, Daniel M.},
  date = {2007-04-01},
  journaltitle = {Environmental Science \& Technology},
  shortjournal = {Environ. Sci. Technol.},
  volume = {41},
  number = {7},
  pages = {2087--2094},
  issn = {0013-936X, 1520-5851},
  doi = {10.1021/es0725089},
  url = {https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/es0725089},
  urldate = {2022-09-09},
  langid = {english},
}


@article{loveringHistoricalConstructionCosts2016,
  title = {Historical Construction Costs of Global Nuclear Power Reactors},
  author = {Lovering, Jessica R. and Yip, Arthur and Nordhaus, Ted},
  date = {2016-04-01},
  journaltitle = {Energy Policy},
  shortjournal = {Energy Policy},
  volume = {91},
  pages = {371--382},
  issn = {0301-4215},
  doi = {10.1016/j.enpol.2016.01.011},
  url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421516300106},
  urldate = {2025-06-17},
  abstract = {The existing literature on the construction costs of nuclear power reactors has focused almost exclusively on trends in construction costs in only two countries, the United States and France, and during two decades, the 1970s and 1980s. These analyses, Koomey and Hultman (2007); Grubler (2010), and Escobar-Rangel and Lévêque (2015), study only 26\% of reactors built globally between 1960 and 2010, providing an incomplete picture of the economic evolution of nuclear power construction. This study curates historical reactor-specific overnight construction cost (OCC) data that broaden the scope of study substantially, covering the full cost history for 349 reactors in the US, France, Canada, West Germany, Japan, India, and South Korea, encompassing 58\% of all reactors built globally. We find that trends in costs have varied significantly in magnitude and in structure by era, country, and experience. In contrast to the rapid cost escalation that characterized nuclear construction in the United States, we find evidence of much milder cost escalation in many countries, including absolute cost declines in some countries and specific eras. Our new findings suggest that there is no inherent cost escalation trend associated with nuclear technology.},
  keywords = {Experience curves,International comparison,Nuclear construction costs},
}


@article{liuCanChinaBreak2025,
  title = {Can {{China}} Break the ‘Cost Curse’ of Nuclear Power?},
  author = {Liu, Shangwei and He, Gang and Qiu, Minghao and Kammen, Daniel M.},
  date = {2025-07},
  journaltitle = {Nature},
  volume = {643},
  number = {8074},
  pages = {1186--1188},
  publisher = {Nature Publishing Group},
  issn = {1476-4687},
  doi = {10.1038/d41586-025-02341-z},
  url = {https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-02341-z},
  urldate = {2025-07-28},
  abstract = {Strengthening regulations and domestic supply chains could be key to making nuclear power more economically viable.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Energy,Government,Industry},
}


@article{rothwellProjectedElectricityCosts2022,
  title = {Projected Electricity Costs in International Nuclear Power Markets},
  author = {Rothwell, Geoffrey},
  date = {2022-05-01},
  journaltitle = {Energy Policy},
  shortjournal = {Energy Policy},
  volume = {164},
  pages = {112905},
  issn = {0301-4215},
  doi = {10.1016/j.enpol.2022.112905},
  url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421522001306},
  urldate = {2025-07-29},
  abstract = {The nuclear power industries in member countries of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have lost global nuclear market share to Russian and Chinese firms. A recent OECD report claims, under restrictive assumptions, that (1) nuclear power units using OECD member country technologies are competitive with those using Russian and Chinese technologies, and (2) nuclear power has lower expected average costs than coal (with carbon dioxide taxes) and renewables. OECD based firms are hoping to catch up to Russia and China with Small Modular Reactors and advanced nuclear technologies. But unless OECD member governments and utilities are willing to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in financing their nuclear industries’ projects, it will be difficult to stop Russian and/or Chinese dominance of the global nuclear industry after 2030.},
  keywords = {Light water reactors,Nuclear energy policy,Nuclear market competition,Nuclear power costs},
}


@article{chen2023deploying,
  author = {Chen, Shi and Lu, Xi and P. Nielsen, Chris and B. McElroy,
    Michael and He, Gang and Zhang, Shaohui and He, Kebin and Yang, Xiu
    and Zhang, Fang and Hao, Jimin},
  title = {Deploying Solar Photovoltaic Energy First in Carbon-Intensive
    Regions Brings Gigatons More Carbon Mitigations to 2060},
  journal = {Communications Earth \& Environment},
  volume = {4},
  pages = {369},
  date = {2023-10-11},
  url = {https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-023-01006-x},
  doi = {10.1038/s43247-023-01006-x},
  langid = {en}
}


@article{helveston_he_davidson_2022,
	title = {Quantifying the cost savings of global solar photovoltaic supply chains},
	doi = {10.1038/s41586-022-05316-6},
	journaltitle = {Nature},
	author = {Helveston, John and He, Gang and Davidson, Michael},
	date = {2022},
	volume = {612},
	number = {7938},
  pages = {83-87}
}

@article{He2017efa,
        title = {Experiences and lessons from China{'}s success in providing electricity for all},
        journal = {Resources, Conservation and Recycling},
        year = {2017},
        volume = {122},
        pages = {335-338},
        author = {He, G. and Victor, D.G.},
        doi = {10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.03.011}
}

@article{he_rapid_2020,
	title = {Rapid cost decrease of renewables and storage accelerates the decarbonization of China’s power system},
	volume = {11},
	rights = {2020 The Author(s)},
	issn = {2041-1723},
	url = {https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-16184-x},
	doi = {10.1038/s41467-020-16184-x},
	abstract = {The costs for solar photovoltaics, wind, and battery storage have dropped markedly since 2010, however, many recent studies and reports around the world have not adequately captured such dramatic decrease. Those costs are projected to decline further in the near future, bringing new prospects for the widespread penetration of renewables and extensive power-sector decarbonization that previous policy discussions did not fully consider. Here we show if cost trends for renewables continue, 62\% of China’s electricity could come from non-fossil sources by 2030 at a cost that is 11\% lower than achieved through a business-as-usual approach. Further, China’s power sector could cut half of its 2015 carbon emissions at a cost about 6\% lower compared to business-as-usual conditions.},
	pages = {2486},
	number = {1},
	journaltitle = {Nature Communications},
	author = {He, Gang and Lin, Jiang and Sifuentes, Froylan and Liu, Xu and Abhyankar, Nikit and Phadke, Amol},
	urldate = {2020-07-24},
	date = {2020-05-19},
	langid = {english}
}


@article{davidson2022risks,
  title={Risks of decoupling from China on low-carbon technologies},
  author={Davidson, Michael R and Karplus, Valerie J and Lewis, Joanna I and Nahm, Jonas and Wang, Alex},
  journal={Science},
  volume={377},
  number={6612},
  pages={1266--1269},
  year={2022},
  publisher={American Association for the Advancement of Science},
  doi= {10.1126/science.abq5446}
}

@article{helveston2019china,
  title={China's key role in scaling low-carbon energy technologies},
  author={Helveston, John and Nahm, Jonas},
  journal={Science},
  volume={366},
  number={6467},
  pages={794--796},
  year={2019},
  publisher={American Association for the Advancement of Science},
  doi={10.1126/science.aaz1014}
}


@techreport{asia_society_common_2009,
	title = {Common {Challenge}, {Collaborative} {Response}: {A} {Roadmap} for {U}.{S}.-{China} {Cooperation} on {Energy} and {Climate} {Change}},
	url = {https://asiasociety.org/center-us-china-relations/common-challenge-collaborative-response-roadmap-us-china-cooperation},
	institution = {Asia Society, Center for Climate and Energy Solutions},
	author = {{Asia Society} and {C2ES}},
	month = feb,
	year = {2009},
}

@techreport{asia_society_roadmap_2009,
	title = {A {Roadmap} for {U}.{S}.-{China} {Collaboration} on {Carbon} {Capture} and {Sequestration}},
	url = {https://asiasociety.org/center-us-china-relations/roadmap-us-china-collaboration-carbon-capture-and-sequestration},
	institution = {Asia Society, Center for American Progress, Monitor},
	author = {{Asia Society}},
	month = nov,
	year = {2009},
}

@techreport{asia_society_vital_2014,
	title = {A {Vital} {Partnership}: {California} and {China} {Collaborating} on {Clean} {Energy} and {Combating} {Climate} {Change}},
	url = {https://asiasociety.org/center-us-china-relations/vital-partnership-california-and-china-collaborating-clean-energy-and-comb},
	institution = {Asia Society},
	author = {{Asia Society}},
	month = mar,
	year = {2014},
}