3 ms·
France is a nuclear success story, but they're also a good indicator that even when you're all bought in, there are logistics difficulties that come from your p
by rtpg 3y ago
France is a nuclear success story, but they're also a good indicator that even when you're all bought in, there are logistics difficulties that come from your power generation being centralized to certain locations.
France has like 80% nuclear power, and most of the nuclear plants are actually underutilized! Why would France not use the plants at 100%? Because electricity is kind of fungible, except at massive scales where it totally isn't, and you can't "just" have power generated in the south be used in the north.
Nuclear is more expensive than gas, but once again it is worth pointing out that it is more expensive than solar and wind! Does this mean that we can replace all of the reactors with solar or wind? Obviously not. But if you're sitting there trying to produce energy in places that are not as close to the existing reactors, building energy production facilities that don't take decades to build (for "building big things takes time" reasons) and can work without a constant inflow of water (which is a practical and real concern for these power plants).
- preisschild 3y ago> France has like 80% nuclear power, and most of the nuclear plants are actually underutilized! Why would France not use the plants at 100%? Because more electricity is needed in during certain times, like during the day or when it's winter.
- rtpg 3y agoBut that's the point, really. Nuclear reactors are not economical if you're not really going for it, so in an environment where you are relying heavily on nuclear reactors, suddenly your entire endeavor is not very practical without massive state aid. This is less of a problem in other places that have less nuclear power setup because they can be used to cover the baseline. Now, EDF is turning off reactors over the weekend cuz the power isn't needed, and in periods of high demand EDF doesn't actually have the capacity, because they don't have much peak generation! Building more nuclear plants to cover peaks would make everything even more expensive, And decomissioning reactors entirely would cause their own massive issues because, again, electricity generation is not fungible. One would (correctly!) point that most renewables don't help with peak generation either, and you would be right. But if you're planning on decomissioning a nuclear power plant, replacing some of that capacity with renewables at least gets your operating costs down. And energy storage solutions that are more fungible... well... you walk and chew bubble gum. Use what you have, and build what makes sense. Just in 2023 your choices for clean power generation for energy storage are vast.