Очень интересно было почитать о CANDU реакторах.

"Economics

The neutron economy of heavy water moderation and precise control of on-line refueling allow CANDU to use a great range of fuels other than enriched uranium, e.g., natural uranium, reprocessed uranium, thorium, plutonium, and used LWR fuel. Given the expense of enrichment, this can make fuel much cheaper. There is however an initial investment into the tonnes of 99.75% pure[5] heavy water to fill the core and heat transfer system. In the case of the Darlington plant, costs releases as part of a freedom of information act request put the cost of the heavy water at $1.528 billion, while capital costs on the plant were $5.117 billion.[6] This means the cost of the heavy water is 23% of the capital costs of the plant.

Since heavy water is less efficient at slowing neutrons, CANDU needs a larger moderator to fuel ratio and a larger core for the same power output. Although a calandria-based core is cheaper to build, its size increases the cost for standard features like the containment building. Generally nuclear plant construction and operations are ~65% of overall lifetime cost; for CANDU costs are dominated by construction even more. Fueling CANDU is cheaper than other reactors, costing only ~10% of the total, so the overall price per kWh electricity is comparable .The next generation Advanced CANDU Reactor (ACR) mitigates these disadvantages by having light water coolant and using a more compact core with less moderator.

When first introduced, CANDUs offered much better capacity factor (ratio of power generated to what would be generated by running at full power, 100% of the time) than LWRs of a similar generation. The light-water designs spent, on average, about half the time being refueled or maintained. However, since the 1980s dramatic improvements in LWR outage management have narrowed the gap, with several units achieving capacity factors ~90% and higher, with an overall fleet performance of 92% in 2010.[7] The latest-generation CANDU 6 reactors have a 88-90% CF, but overall performance is dominated by the older Canadian units with CFs on the order of 80%.[8] Refurbished units have demonstrated poor performance to date, on the order of 65%.[9]

Some CANDU plants suffered from cost overruns during construction, often from external factors such as government action.[10] For instance, a number of imposed construction delays led to roughly a doubling of the cost of the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station near Toronto, Ontario. Technical problems and redesigns added about another billion to the resulting $14.4 billion price.[11] In contrast, in 2002 two CANDU 6 reactors at Qinshan in China were completed on-schedule and on-budget[citation needed], an achievement attributed to tight control over scope and schedule.[12]"

Как я понял, у них нет экономически выгодных заводов, обогащающих уран, поэтому они решили использовать природный уран (или слабообогащённый), а в качестве замедлителя тяжёлую воду, поскольку она меньше замедляет реакцию. Соответственно, размеры реактора стали огромными, а стоимость тяжёлой воды для реактора составляет около 23% СТОИМОСТИ ВСЕЙ АЭС. Но скорее всего даже больше.
Короче, как я понял, с экономической точки зрения, эти АЭС не выгодны.