The nuclear KWH not expensive! True price of EDF nuclear?

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
alex29
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 18
Registration: 14/01/10, 18:15

The nuclear KWH not expensive! True price of EDF nuclear?




by alex29 » 29/01/10, 16:32

Hello,


I just read wrong information ..

Right here :
https://www.econologie.com/le-prix-d-une ... -3695.html

Qualifying nuclear energy as "cheap" is a big mistake ... Of course if we want to relay the propaganda of the French nuclear lobby which does not include all the subsidies granted in France to the nuclear sector.

On the contrary, it is much more expensive than conventional thermal power stations or even wind power.

Thus the nuclear KWH is at least 30% more expensive than wind ...

I advise you to read this file.
http://www.ieer.org/ensec/no-40/no40frnc/costs.html

or this one which has just been published in the Usa by NREL:

http://www.nrel.gov/wind/systemsintegration/pdfs/2010/ewits_executive_summary.pdf

The price of Kw.h supplied by wind power plants for onshore wind power is 5,5 ct euro), and costs on average 8,1 ct € for offshore wind power.
The production cost of nuclear kW.h has an average price of 8,2 ct Euro.
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 29/01/10, 16:38

Troll spotted?

Take one of your EDF bills and tell us how much you pay for your kWh ... and then compare it to other European countries ...

Then tell us what you're up to.

The rest is politics and you like me couldn't help it ...
Last edited by Christophe the 29 / 01 / 10, 17: 08, 1 edited once.
0 x
alex29
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 18
Registration: 14/01/10, 18:15




by alex29 » 29/01/10, 16:43

When EDF announces a minimum of 55 euros per MWH at the exit from the Flamanville EPR, it is a beginning of realism ...

It is for this reason that the regulated tariff will not be able to hold out much longer.


Politics is to pretend that nuclear is cheap.

What does not appear on the invoice is transferred to grants.

Unless France has invented nuclear reactors which produce at lower cost? Which is unfortunately not the case ... Or even the opposite.
0 x
aerialcastor
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 865
Registration: 10/05/09, 16:39
x 21




by aerialcastor » 29/01/10, 17:00

I believe Alex means that the price per nuclear kWh is not expensive on the bill because it does not reflect the actual price.

Without being a specialist far from it, it seems to me that the price of waste treatment is paid by the community, and that nuclear research comes essentially from military funds.
0 x
Save a tree, eat a beaver.
It is no use to succeed in life, what it takes is to miss his death.
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 29/01/10, 17:00

55 € per MWh is 5.5 cents per KWh, sold for 12 cents including subscription is economically (and financially) feasible.

So where is the problem?
0 x
alex29
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 18
Registration: 14/01/10, 18:15




by alex29 » 29/01/10, 17:13

I do not know if there is a problem, but to say that the electricity produced by nuclear reactors is cheap is not realistic.

I am currently researching the subject.

There have been studies, like this one, which points to the colossal level of subsidies granted to the nuclear industry.

http://resosol.org/controverses/detente.html

If indeed on the bill, we have, in France the KWH among the cheapest in Europe., This is not due to nuclear technology, but to its mode of financing which came in subsidies not taken into account in the cost of KWH ...


And what bothers me is that today, in France, we devalue wind energy, with speeches like "wind kwh costs 4 times more than nuclear kwh" whereas reality, with 2009 construction costs, is quite different ...
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 29/01/10, 17:17

Am not pro nuke you know but ...

aerialcastor wrote:it seems to me that the price of waste treatment is paid by the community, and that nuclear research comes essentially from military funds.


Yes that's what they say ...

a) it's no secret
b) it remains to be confirmed that it is so subsidized that

Then I'm not sure if it's military background (on the other hand the civilian nuclear program is the "profitability" of the military nuclear program) but if it was the case I prefer that the money of the soldiers goes in the civil research that in weapons ... not you?

I also prefer that my taxes go into securing nuclear power and the sustainability of waste management (can we dream not?) Than in repaying a public debt to scammers ...

So where exactly is the problem?

Whether those who are not happy with the nuke, take a green electricity subscription or install PV... and stop breaking our candies with an insoluble problem on our scale ...

This will make things happen more than constantly repeating the same things ...
0 x
alex29
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 18
Registration: 14/01/10, 18:15




by alex29 » 29/01/10, 17:37

I’m working on nothing .. I come across a page that says inaccurate things, so I share it with forum. It's a taboo subject, it looks like?
0 x
alex29
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 18
Registration: 14/01/10, 18:15




by alex29 » 29/01/10, 17:42

If not, there is also the issue of dismantling, which it risks posing a serious economic problem. In fact, unless I am mistaken, EDF makes provisions for up to 15% of the construction price. However, it seems from numerous NGOs which have compared the level of these reservations to what is practiced in Great Britain and Germany, that there is a manifest underestimation ... And not by a few percent, but downright by a factor of 5 to 10 ... See on Wikipedia .. It is worrying.
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 29/01/10, 17:44

Sorry but these figures are correct they come from http://www.sfen.org/ and are confirmed by ASN, Ademe ... you can always say that these are all big rotten ... so what?

Then it depends on your repository and your way of seeing: almost everything is subsidized in our world starting with your birth, your education ... your professional life (more or less it depends on what you do), your health, then your retirement and even your death (especially if you don't die " quickly"...)...

Stay closer to you: what do you think Greenpeace is living for if not subsidies?


So I repeat: where is the problem with subsidized nuclear power? What do you mean via this topic? Would you prefer nuclear twice as expensive? Would you prefer that it not be subsidized and that there be more risks?

Sorry I don't understand your message ...

Obviously you did not understand that here we were looking for solutions rather than going around in circles around insoluble problems?

So what do you suggest as a solution to this problem?

I'll give you one: you self tax your kWh at 300%. You put 24 cents aside each time you give 12 to EDF. When you have had enough you invest in PV ... or in a green electricity contract.

Nothing prevents you from doing that ...
Last edited by Christophe the 29 / 01 / 10, 17: 51, 1 edited once.
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : Bing [Bot] and 323 guests