5 ms·

The first hit for "france nuclear power production cost" comes up with this: https://www.enerdata.net/publications/daily-energy-news/frances-cre-unveils-foreca

The first hit for "france nuclear power production cost" comes up with this: https://www.enerdata.net/publications/daily-energy-news/frances-cre-unveils-forecast-nuclear-power-costs-over-period-2026-2040.html https://www.enerdata.net/publications/daily-energy-news/fran... > The full cost of existing nuclear power calculated by the CRE amounts to respectively €60.7/MWh over the period 2026-2030 And the first hit for "wind power cost europe mwhr" shows just how subsidized nuclear is: https://windeurope.org/policy/topics/economics/ https://windeurope.org/policy/topics/economics/ At its cheapest wind is half the cost of nuclear and at its worst is the same cost as nuclear - with none of the massive headaches.

briandear 2y ago
Wind has huge headaches.. bird deaths, littering the landscape with ugly windmills. Offshore wind farms also harm whales. The turbine blades end up in landfills.
- IshKebab 2y ago
  > bird deaths Ugh how long will it take for this to die?
  - belorn 2y ago
    Should operators be exempted from fines and liability when endangered birds are killed? If the answer is no, then the myth can die. If the answer is yes, then it will survive until wind farms operators no longer seek to be exempted.
    - ViewTrick1002 2y ago
      Why should they not be exempted when we today understand how and why it’s happening and they are following the environmental rules set forth for their operating permit? For example ensuring plants don’t get built in endangered bird habitats and rules concerning operation during endangered birds migratory periods. Seems like you want wind power to fail, like nuclear is, and are attempting to sling any potential mud you can find.
      - chickenbig 2y ago
        > Why should they not be exempted when we today understand how and why it’s happening and they are following the environmental rules set forth for their operating permit? So we should allow companies to operate unhindered within (evidence based) rules. Seems like an idea. Let us use that approach for all activities, including nuclear power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model is a model with scant evidence in the range relevant to operating a power station. Having said that the ICRP will be updating their model within a decade or so, so perhaps that barrier will disappear.
        ViewTrick1002 2y ago
        Let’s remove the Price Anderson act as well and have the nuclear plants insure for Fukushima level accident costs rather than relying on the tax payers to pick up the tab. The entire industry would shut down tomorrow if they had to pay the true insurance cost. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuclear_Industries_Indemnity_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuclear...
        chickenbig 2y ago
        > have the nuclear plants insure for Fukushima level accident costs The flip-side of the Price Anderson act is that the NRC is deeply involved in the operations of nuclear power stations. Why stop at nuclear; why not aircraft, social networks or unvaccinated people? Also make all companies unlimited liability so their shareholders are accountable when something goes wrong.
        ViewTrick1002 2y ago
        Now you managed to pinpoint the issue with nuclear power. Criticism is met with “don’t you dare question the subsidies” and then a stream of whataboutism across completely different industries rather than daring to compare with the alternative: renewables. Because you already know that comparison makes the nuclear case even worse than it already is. Renewables don’t have capped liability, at worst if regular insurance coverage is not enough the company will be bankrupted and the assets sold to pay for the damages. For renewables it is already baked into the price because the risks are near zero.
zahlman 2y ago
> The full cost of existing nuclear power calculated by the CRE amounts to respectively €60.7/MWh over the period 2026-2030 Which is 6 euro cents per KWh. Fully in line with what I said. French consumers are paying less for their electricity than, for example, Californians (https://www.cnet.com/home/energy-and-utilities/heres-the-average-electric-bill-in-california-and-how-to-save/ https://www.cnet.com/home/energy-and-utilities/heres-the-ave...) where electricity largely comes from natural gas (https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2021-total-system-electric-generation https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/califo...). >And the first hit for "wind power cost europe mwhr" shows just how subsidized nuclear is: This source makes a vague claim about LCOE estimations not taking subsidies into account. It says nothing to establish the amount of those subsidies, or even to quantify the cost of any power source besides wind. >with none of the massive headaches. Onshore wind generation has plenty of drawbacks. Much of what's commonly said against nuclear is baseless fearmongering.
chickenbig 2y ago
> > The full cost of existing nuclear power calculated by the CRE amounts to respectively €60.7/MWh over the period 2026-2030 Assuming that price is with a 77% capacity factor there is an easy way to reduce the cost per MWh; get them to run with a higher capacity factor. Finland has achieved 94% over the last few years, and the US is up at 93% I believe. https://pris.iaea.org/PRIS/CountryStatistics/CountryDetails.aspx?current=FI https://pris.iaea.org/PRIS/CountryStatistics/CountryDetails.... Assuming that this is mainly fixed costs the price could be down to 60.7*.77/.94 = 50 EUR/MWh; fuel is a minor input and might bump the price up to perhaps 53 EUR/MWh.

briandear 2y ago

Wind has huge headaches.. bird deaths, littering the landscape with ugly windmills. Offshore wind farms also harm whales. The turbine blades end up in landfills.

IshKebab 2y ago
> bird deaths Ugh how long will it take for this to die?
- belorn 2y ago
  Should operators be exempted from fines and liability when endangered birds are killed? If the answer is no, then the myth can die. If the answer is yes, then it will survive until wind farms operators no longer seek to be exempted.
  - ViewTrick1002 2y ago
    Why should they not be exempted when we today understand how and why it’s happening and they are following the environmental rules set forth for their operating permit? For example ensuring plants don’t get built in endangered bird habitats and rules concerning operation during endangered birds migratory periods. Seems like you want wind power to fail, like nuclear is, and are attempting to sling any potential mud you can find.
    - chickenbig 2y ago
      > Why should they not be exempted when we today understand how and why it’s happening and they are following the environmental rules set forth for their operating permit? So we should allow companies to operate unhindered within (evidence based) rules. Seems like an idea. Let us use that approach for all activities, including nuclear power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model is a model with scant evidence in the range relevant to operating a power station. Having said that the ICRP will be updating their model within a decade or so, so perhaps that barrier will disappear.
      - ViewTrick1002 2y ago
        Let’s remove the Price Anderson act as well and have the nuclear plants insure for Fukushima level accident costs rather than relying on the tax payers to pick up the tab. The entire industry would shut down tomorrow if they had to pay the true insurance cost. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuclear_Industries_Indemnity_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuclear...
        chickenbig 2y ago
        > have the nuclear plants insure for Fukushima level accident costs The flip-side of the Price Anderson act is that the NRC is deeply involved in the operations of nuclear power stations. Why stop at nuclear; why not aircraft, social networks or unvaccinated people? Also make all companies unlimited liability so their shareholders are accountable when something goes wrong.
        ViewTrick1002 2y ago
        Now you managed to pinpoint the issue with nuclear power. Criticism is met with “don’t you dare question the subsidies” and then a stream of whataboutism across completely different industries rather than daring to compare with the alternative: renewables. Because you already know that comparison makes the nuclear case even worse than it already is. Renewables don’t have capped liability, at worst if regular insurance coverage is not enough the company will be bankrupted and the assets sold to pay for the damages. For renewables it is already baked into the price because the risks are near zero.

zahlman 2y ago

> The full cost of existing nuclear power calculated by the CRE amounts to respectively €60.7/MWh over the period 2026-2030 Which is 6 euro cents per KWh. Fully in line with what I said. French consumers are paying less for their electricity than, for example, Californians (https://www.cnet.com/home/energy-and-utilities/heres-the-average-electric-bill-in-california-and-how-to-save/ https://www.cnet.com/home/energy-and-utilities/heres-the-ave...) where electricity largely comes from natural gas (https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2021-total-system-electric-generation https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/califo...). >And the first hit for "wind power cost europe mwhr" shows just how subsidized nuclear is: This source makes a vague claim about LCOE estimations not taking subsidies into account. It says nothing to establish the amount of those subsidies, or even to quantify the cost of any power source besides wind. >with none of the massive headaches. Onshore wind generation has plenty of drawbacks. Much of what's commonly said against nuclear is baseless fearmongering.

chickenbig 2y ago

> > The full cost of existing nuclear power calculated by the CRE amounts to respectively €60.7/MWh over the period 2026-2030 Assuming that price is with a 77% capacity factor there is an easy way to reduce the cost per MWh; get them to run with a higher capacity factor. Finland has achieved 94% over the last few years, and the US is up at 93% I believe. https://pris.iaea.org/PRIS/CountryStatistics/CountryDetails.aspx?current=FI https://pris.iaea.org/PRIS/CountryStatistics/CountryDetails.... Assuming that this is mainly fixed costs the price could be down to 60.7*.77/.94 = 50 EUR/MWh; fuel is a minor input and might bump the price up to perhaps 53 EUR/MWh.