4 ms·

Here’s an article discussing the costs more: “The Hinkley Point C case: is nuclear energy expensive?” https://medium.com/generation-atomic/the-hinkley-point-c-c

by erentz 6y ago

Here’s an article discussing the costs more: “The Hinkley Point C case: is nuclear energy expensive?” https://medium.com/generation-atomic/the-hinkley-point-c-case-is-nuclear-energy-expensive-f89b1aa05c27 https://medium.com/generation-atomic/the-hinkley-point-c-cas...

gautamcgoel 6y ago
Great read, thanks do much for the link! It's really refreshing to see the actual math. Main takeaway: nuclear can be cheap if financed properly, but incredibly expensive otherwise. Also, nuclear plants eventually become highly valuable cash cows, once the huge initial investment is recouped.
fuoqi 6y ago
Importance of mass-production can not be underestimated. ERP has only 2 working reactors and 3 in construction. Meanwhile Russia produces VVER reactors in an almost conveyor-like fashion (see list in [0]), iterating on design and streamlining construction process, which results in more than twice smaller CAPEX per GW and less delays. Such mass production allows to lower cost of R&D per built reactor and in general to "spread" cost of supporting country's nuclear expertise, which is then used for development of new technologies such as breeders and non-RTG space reactors (though sadly the latter does not see much development lately). When energy cost of nuclear vs renewables is compared it's very common not only to forget about cost of storage and of additional generation capacity (including natural gas peak plants) required for renewables, but also to bring cost of nuclear based on the projects like ERP, not on the Russian/Chinese/Korean projects, which arguably have much more sensible and viable in long-term energy policy. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VVER#Power_plants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VVER#Power_plants
- 7952 6y ago
  Arguably the reason for the success of renewables in the UK is that the government gave big subsidy opportunities early on, and then made cost reduction a condition of future subsidy. And there is a strong grid operator that can do strategic planning. This worked for wind, solar, and maybe battery storage now. And this regulated/grid based approach is what deals with issues like intermittency. People may forget these things in a discussion on the web, but the grid and regulators do not. And actually Hinckley and Sizewell do fit within this model. They have been given very high strike prices and hopefully will be able to deliver a more cost effective pipeline of projects later on. But this approach is more difficult with large, monolithic projects.

by erentz 6y ago

gautamcgoel 6y ago

Great read, thanks do much for the link! It's really refreshing to see the actual math. Main takeaway: nuclear can be cheap if financed properly, but incredibly expensive otherwise. Also, nuclear plants eventually become highly valuable cash cows, once the huge initial investment is recouped.

fuoqi 6y ago

Importance of mass-production can not be underestimated. ERP has only 2 working reactors and 3 in construction. Meanwhile Russia produces VVER reactors in an almost conveyor-like fashion (see list in [0]), iterating on design and streamlining construction process, which results in more than twice smaller CAPEX per GW and less delays. Such mass production allows to lower cost of R&D per built reactor and in general to "spread" cost of supporting country's nuclear expertise, which is then used for development of new technologies such as breeders and non-RTG space reactors (though sadly the latter does not see much development lately). When energy cost of nuclear vs renewables is compared it's very common not only to forget about cost of storage and of additional generation capacity (including natural gas peak plants) required for renewables, but also to bring cost of nuclear based on the projects like ERP, not on the Russian/Chinese/Korean projects, which arguably have much more sensible and viable in long-term energy policy. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VVER#Power_plants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VVER#Power_plants

7952 6y ago
Arguably the reason for the success of renewables in the UK is that the government gave big subsidy opportunities early on, and then made cost reduction a condition of future subsidy. And there is a strong grid operator that can do strategic planning. This worked for wind, solar, and maybe battery storage now. And this regulated/grid based approach is what deals with issues like intermittency. People may forget these things in a discussion on the web, but the grid and regulators do not. And actually Hinckley and Sizewell do fit within this model. They have been given very high strike prices and hopefully will be able to deliver a more cost effective pipeline of projects later on. But this approach is more difficult with large, monolithic projects.