3 ms·
Generally a hybrid of energy solutions gives the best possibility of sustained development, though you're right to point to the difference in average cost. Poss
by not_a_cop75 7y ago
Generally a hybrid of energy solutions gives the best possibility of sustained development, though you're right to point to the difference in average cost. Possible though that you're conflating an average wind price with a specific nuclear price? That's apples and oranges. Compare the London offshore array (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Array https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Array) cost per MWh directly to the Hinkley Point C nuclear plant (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkley_Point_C_nuclear_power_station https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkley_Point_C_nuclear_power_...).
Lastly, note the borrowing rate for the nuclear plant was extremely high. That would certainly have been part of the problem in financial expenditures.
"
According to December 2017 estimates, Hinkley is being built for £20.3bn by 2025, to be paid over a 35 year period.[10] According to Dieter Helm, professor of Energy Policy at the University of Oxford, "Hinkley Point C would have been roughly half the cost if the government had been borrowing the money to build it at 2%, rather than EDF's cost of capital, which was 9%."
"
- tonyedgecombe 7y agoWhy is EDF paying 9%, is that a recognition of the risk of failure?