In a recent critique published in E24, Øystein Sjølie addresses the economic implications of nuclear power as discussed in the book "Energikrisen." The discourse involves a contentious debate on the financial viability and analytical fallacies associated with nuclear energy investments. Professors Atle Guttormsen and Jonas Kristiansen Nøland from Norwegian universities respond to Sjølie’s assertions, emphasizing that debt repayment terms are an inherent aspect of any financed project, including those related to nuclear power generation.

The authors highlight that nuclear plants, such as Hinkley Point C, operate under lengthy contracts designed to recover investments over time. They argue against the notion raised by Sjølie that 'repayment' is not a recognized term in investment analysis, providing clarity that categorically, every project financed through debt has a defined repayment period. This argument establishes that the operation of a nuclear power plant should not be solely measured by its market value but should also account for its operational costs after repayment.

Ultimately, the message is clear: the debate surrounding nuclear energy is complex and multifaceted, encompassing far more than the initial investments and repayment issues. The perspectives offered by Guttormsen and Nøland advocate for a more nuanced understanding of nuclear power economics and its role in the larger energy crisis debate in Norway and beyond.