Ditch the jargon
To attract financial institutions to new build projects, the nuclear industry needs to avoid 'nuke-speak' and learn to talk like a banker, writes George Borovas.
To attract financial institutions to new build projects, the nuclear power industry needs to avoid 'nuke-speak' and learn to talk like a banker, writes George Borovas.
Here is a guide to some of the commonly used – and potentially misinterpreted – terms.
Industry says: latest technology
Bank hears: first-of-a-kind risk
Industry says: proven safety record
Bank remembers: Chernobyl, Three Mile Island and Fukushima
Industry says: construction schedule
Bank worries about: delays and cost overruns
Industry says: consortium
Bank thinks: interface risk
Industry says: channeling of liability
Bank worries about: gaps, inconsistencies, and neighbouring countries
Industry says: peaceful use
Bank considers: nuclear proliferation
Industry says: well-regulated industry
Bank queries: host country regulator
Industry says: localisation
Bank hears: supply chain risk
Industry says: with Government support
Bank worries about: political risk and a Germany-style phase out
Industry says: Contracts for Difference or long-term Power Purchase Agreement
Bank acknowledges: state aid investigations
Industry says: long-term economics
Bank hears: electricity market risk
Industry says: new nuclear program
Bank hears: host country commitment and resources
George Borovas
Comments? Please send them to editor@world-nuclear-news.org
George Borovas is the head of Shearman & Sterling's Global Nuclear Group and a partner in the firm's Project Development & Finance Group.
