6 ms·
> France ("consistently invested in nuclear for the past half-century" ). Not really and this is currenctly causing a big problem. France stopped building new
by sirk390 2y ago
> France ("consistently invested in nuclear for the past half-century" ).
Not really and this is currenctly causing a big problem. France stopped building new reactors after 2002. They only built 1 new generation EPR, which was very late and 6x the cost.
Many of the reactors are very old and need to be replaced, but it's difficult to do because of the bad experiences of Flamanville's reactor.
- BenoitP 2y ago1 > 0. And most of the cost comes from maintaining engineer's salaries on a single project. If new projects get ordered I'm quite confident costs will move closer to the actual bill of materials, per unit.
- maigret 2y agoThere are other EPR projects abroad and most did overshoot costs by more than 5 to $10B and having a decade delay. Meanwhile renewable and storage keep getting cheaper and better at massive speed. Even France adds much more renewable than nuclear capacity right now. Which is a pragmatic approach... Stay skilled in nuclear and keep minimum investment to keep the industry alive but invest mostly in renewable.