6 ms·

The issue is simple: privatizations. The public in the past have invested for the public interests. After the private have do not profiting from old State made

by kkfx 4y ago

The issue is simple: privatizations. The public in the past have invested for the public interests. After the private have do not profiting from old State made investments leaving anything else falling apart. When they reach a certain level of mess they going out, leaving the State arrange the mess and handle the rage, waiting to came back once a new wave of investments will repair the mess. Unfortunately people seems to ignore that, allowing such model to prosper.

cm2187 4y ago
Not sure what privatisations have to do with the problem. My understanding is that it is a combination of a technical problem (corrosion happening at an unexpected pace) and the impact of covid lockdowns which deferred critical maintenance.
- ohgodplsno 4y ago
  Privatization has everything to do with the problem. Let's take EDF and our nuclear plants. Why is EDF struggling financially today ? Because, through the magic of _opening up to the market_, they have been forced to sell up to 100TWh are prices as low as €40/MWh. The new private operators that came in simply resold that. And right now ? They're even kicking out clients, just so they could sell on the market at €1000/MWh. What does EDF struggling financially mean ? Among others, fully depending on the state to give them the money they need to exist, not being able to keep training and maintain specialists to repair such corrosion (we needed to import people because there were simply not enough qualified engineers for that), not being able to build more plants and therefore losing our edge in nuclear power. Why are most of our public services struggling ? Because over time, they've been handed out to private companies. Unemployment office ? Partly privatized. Tax collection from employers ? Privatized. Healthcare ? Partly privatized, and the beast is being starved so they can privatize it more. There has not been a single, memorable outcome of a public service being privatized in France and it getting better.
  - alwayseasy 4y ago
    > Among others, fully depending on the state to give them the money they need to exist, not being able to keep training and maintain specialists to repair such corrosion (we needed to import people because there were simply not enough qualified engineers for that), not being able to build more plants and therefore losing our edge in nuclear power. EDF is struggling because the state kept intervening and asking them to shut down future nuclear plants. You can't have specialists if they are retiring and the state destroyed any career prospects due to planning they would shut down plants...
    - Gwypaas 4y ago
      Have a look at Flamanville 3 and then try to sell another 20 of those to the public. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_Nuclear_Power_Plan...
      - dividedbyzero 4y ago
        Oops: > EDF estimated the cost at €3.3 billion[6] and stated it would start commercial operations in 2012, after construction lasting 54 months.[7] The latest cost estimate (July 2020) is at €19.1 billion, with commissioning planned tentatively at the end of 2022.[8][2] That's ten years late at 578% the projected cost.
        lolive 4y ago
        Subcontractors are extatic !
  - Gwypaas 4y ago
    > they have been forced to sell up to 100TWh are prices as low as €40/MWh. Should be plenty. The Swedish paid off nuclear plants operate around €25/MWh. Lazard similarly puts the range for paid-off nuclear plants at $24-$33/MWh. It's simply mismanagement of a golden goose. https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-levelized-cost-of-storage-and-levelized-cost-of-hydrogen/ https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-...
mhh__ 4y ago
The issue with "privatisation" (they're not all the same) IMO is that it's usually done by politicians trying to get something for nothing. Lets say the benefits of privatisation are 10% cheaper widgets or power stations, a politician will aim for 30%. Goodbye future.
- guggle 4y ago
  Private or public, nuclear does not like short-term management. And there has been too much of it lately, mostly because politics.
ttymck 4y ago
Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but I can't quite follow what you're saying. I know it's anti-privatization, but I can really make out the rest. What does this mean > "After the private have do not profiting from old State made investments leaving anything else falling apart. When they reach a certain level of mess they going out, leaving the State arrange the mess and handle the rage"
- oezi 4y ago
  He means that a publically built monopoly rarely benefits from privatization. Because the efficiency gains will largely be extracted by the private owners.
  - Raed667 4y ago
    there was also an (ideology motivated) sabotage, where EDF is forced to sell at a loss to private competitors who produce nothing, who then will turn around and sell to customers at a cheaper price than EDF. So they can claim that private is obviously better.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - kergonath 4y ago
      It’s all a house of cards anyway, as the “alternative providers” who were supposed to provide all that magical agile goodness through the wonders of competition fold one after the other and are actively pushing their customers to EDF. That’s cargo cult economics: someone said competition was good so we’re going to have all the appearances of it without giving up on our large publicly-funded infrastructure. Because at the end of the day we need electricity and all these rent seekers are only good at extracting value from existing installations. Utterly disgusting.
      - Gibbon1 4y ago
        That's what I call Potemkin Markets. You see that everywhere, enabling insiders to engage in legal risk free looting but claiming it's okay because you sprinkled magic free market pixie dust on it.
lairv 4y ago
Sure, obviously this has nothing to do with a 40-year anti-nuclear policy.
- hinata08 4y ago
  the anti-nuclear policy was in Germany France was proud of the nuclear energy. It had plenty of cheap and carbon-free electricity (it was once exported to all the neighbouring countries) It was a way to be independent energy wise, as more countries can export nuclear fuel than oil. It was building power plants, and processing nuclear waste from other countries And it made plenty of engineers busy ! France used to be a country led by engineers.
  - lairv 4y ago
    Anti-nuclear policy sure was more significant in Germany as it has led to the complete stop of its use, but in France it has also slowed down the development of the industry. Although it has evolved positively over the last three years, nuclear energy remains controversial in public opinion [0,1], and many ecologist and left-wing movements have militated against nuclear power for the last 30 years. Whether or not it had an impact on the country policy toward nuclear power would require a more in-depth and complete archive work, but just remember that Emmanuel Macron was advocating toward reducing the share of nuclear power when he was elected for the first time in 2017 [2] (he has now changed) [0] https://www.ifop.com/publication/lopinion-des-francais-sur-lenergie-nucleaire/ https://www.ifop.com/publication/lopinion-des-francais-sur-l... [1] https://www.lesechos.fr/politique-societe/societe/sondage-exclusif-une-majorite-de-francais-reconnait-les-merites-du-nucleaire-1361153 https://www.lesechos.fr/politique-societe/societe/sondage-ex... [2] https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x87skbx https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x87skbx
    - merb 4y ago
      wow... I mean france basically said at the start of the energy crises that they will build tons of new nuclear plants! they even were the most influential country within the eu which made it possible that the eu gives funding for nuclear plants. I'm really not sure what you want? of course for everything there is an anti movement, but france is definitly not anti-nuclear, neither are most of its people.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
gobip 4y ago
Your own argument is busted by.. your own argument. EDF has been nationalized again and here we are. The issue isn't "privatizations".
- ohgodplsno 4y ago
  Lol no it hasn't. As of last year, the state owned 83% of EDF, along with everything that being a publicly traded company entails. The renationalization process has been started, then immediately halted by shareholders that sued to block it. Additionally, things don't get magically fixed because it belongs to the state again. The current state of things is the result of 20 years of selling off EDF, piece by piece to vultures.
- kevingadd 4y ago
  This is like watching a new administration take over government and then blaming them a month later for problems caused by the previous administrators. It takes time to fix years of neglect and malicious incompetence.

by kkfx 4y ago

cm2187 4y ago

Not sure what privatisations have to do with the problem. My understanding is that it is a combination of a technical problem (corrosion happening at an unexpected pace) and the impact of covid lockdowns which deferred critical maintenance.

ohgodplsno 4y ago
Privatization has everything to do with the problem. Let's take EDF and our nuclear plants. Why is EDF struggling financially today ? Because, through the magic of _opening up to the market_, they have been forced to sell up to 100TWh are prices as low as €40/MWh. The new private operators that came in simply resold that. And right now ? They're even kicking out clients, just so they could sell on the market at €1000/MWh. What does EDF struggling financially mean ? Among others, fully depending on the state to give them the money they need to exist, not being able to keep training and maintain specialists to repair such corrosion (we needed to import people because there were simply not enough qualified engineers for that), not being able to build more plants and therefore losing our edge in nuclear power. Why are most of our public services struggling ? Because over time, they've been handed out to private companies. Unemployment office ? Partly privatized. Tax collection from employers ? Privatized. Healthcare ? Partly privatized, and the beast is being starved so they can privatize it more. There has not been a single, memorable outcome of a public service being privatized in France and it getting better.
- alwayseasy 4y ago
  > Among others, fully depending on the state to give them the money they need to exist, not being able to keep training and maintain specialists to repair such corrosion (we needed to import people because there were simply not enough qualified engineers for that), not being able to build more plants and therefore losing our edge in nuclear power. EDF is struggling because the state kept intervening and asking them to shut down future nuclear plants. You can't have specialists if they are retiring and the state destroyed any career prospects due to planning they would shut down plants...
  - Gwypaas 4y ago
    Have a look at Flamanville 3 and then try to sell another 20 of those to the public. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_Nuclear_Power_Plan...
    - dividedbyzero 4y ago
      Oops: > EDF estimated the cost at €3.3 billion[6] and stated it would start commercial operations in 2012, after construction lasting 54 months.[7] The latest cost estimate (July 2020) is at €19.1 billion, with commissioning planned tentatively at the end of 2022.[8][2] That's ten years late at 578% the projected cost.
      - lolive 4y ago
        Subcontractors are extatic !
- Gwypaas 4y ago
  > they have been forced to sell up to 100TWh are prices as low as €40/MWh. Should be plenty. The Swedish paid off nuclear plants operate around €25/MWh. Lazard similarly puts the range for paid-off nuclear plants at $24-$33/MWh. It's simply mismanagement of a golden goose. https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-levelized-cost-of-storage-and-levelized-cost-of-hydrogen/ https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-...

mhh__ 4y ago

The issue with "privatisation" (they're not all the same) IMO is that it's usually done by politicians trying to get something for nothing. Lets say the benefits of privatisation are 10% cheaper widgets or power stations, a politician will aim for 30%. Goodbye future.

guggle 4y ago
Private or public, nuclear does not like short-term management. And there has been too much of it lately, mostly because politics.

ttymck 4y ago

Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but I can't quite follow what you're saying. I know it's anti-privatization, but I can really make out the rest. What does this mean > "After the private have do not profiting from old State made investments leaving anything else falling apart. When they reach a certain level of mess they going out, leaving the State arrange the mess and handle the rage"

oezi 4y ago
He means that a publically built monopoly rarely benefits from privatization. Because the efficiency gains will largely be extracted by the private owners.
- Raed667 4y ago
  there was also an (ideology motivated) sabotage, where EDF is forced to sell at a loss to private competitors who produce nothing, who then will turn around and sell to customers at a cheaper price than EDF. So they can claim that private is obviously better.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - kergonath 4y ago
    It’s all a house of cards anyway, as the “alternative providers” who were supposed to provide all that magical agile goodness through the wonders of competition fold one after the other and are actively pushing their customers to EDF. That’s cargo cult economics: someone said competition was good so we’re going to have all the appearances of it without giving up on our large publicly-funded infrastructure. Because at the end of the day we need electricity and all these rent seekers are only good at extracting value from existing installations. Utterly disgusting.
    - Gibbon1 4y ago
      That's what I call Potemkin Markets. You see that everywhere, enabling insiders to engage in legal risk free looting but claiming it's okay because you sprinkled magic free market pixie dust on it.

lairv 4y ago

Sure, obviously this has nothing to do with a 40-year anti-nuclear policy.

hinata08 4y ago
the anti-nuclear policy was in Germany France was proud of the nuclear energy. It had plenty of cheap and carbon-free electricity (it was once exported to all the neighbouring countries) It was a way to be independent energy wise, as more countries can export nuclear fuel than oil. It was building power plants, and processing nuclear waste from other countries And it made plenty of engineers busy ! France used to be a country led by engineers.
- lairv 4y ago
  Anti-nuclear policy sure was more significant in Germany as it has led to the complete stop of its use, but in France it has also slowed down the development of the industry. Although it has evolved positively over the last three years, nuclear energy remains controversial in public opinion [0,1], and many ecologist and left-wing movements have militated against nuclear power for the last 30 years. Whether or not it had an impact on the country policy toward nuclear power would require a more in-depth and complete archive work, but just remember that Emmanuel Macron was advocating toward reducing the share of nuclear power when he was elected for the first time in 2017 [2] (he has now changed) [0] https://www.ifop.com/publication/lopinion-des-francais-sur-lenergie-nucleaire/ https://www.ifop.com/publication/lopinion-des-francais-sur-l... [1] https://www.lesechos.fr/politique-societe/societe/sondage-exclusif-une-majorite-de-francais-reconnait-les-merites-du-nucleaire-1361153 https://www.lesechos.fr/politique-societe/societe/sondage-ex... [2] https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x87skbx https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x87skbx
  - merb 4y ago
    wow... I mean france basically said at the start of the energy crises that they will build tons of new nuclear plants! they even were the most influential country within the eu which made it possible that the eu gives funding for nuclear plants. I'm really not sure what you want? of course for everything there is an anti movement, but france is definitly not anti-nuclear, neither are most of its people.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

gobip 4y ago

Your own argument is busted by.. your own argument. EDF has been nationalized again and here we are. The issue isn't "privatizations".

ohgodplsno 4y ago
Lol no it hasn't. As of last year, the state owned 83% of EDF, along with everything that being a publicly traded company entails. The renationalization process has been started, then immediately halted by shareholders that sued to block it. Additionally, things don't get magically fixed because it belongs to the state again. The current state of things is the result of 20 years of selling off EDF, piece by piece to vultures.
kevingadd 4y ago
This is like watching a new administration take over government and then blaming them a month later for problems caused by the previous administrators. It takes time to fix years of neglect and malicious incompetence.