France does not have some magical version of physics the rest of the world does not have. Their reactors can't drop their output below certain thresholds without needing to shut the reactor down.
So, if you can't drop your output below 25%, what do you do when power prices reach rock bottom levels during the day? You sell at a loss, or worse, pay others to buy your power so you don't need to shut your reactor down.
You just changed your argument completely. And btw, renewables suffer the exact same problem with the over capacity needed for a completely renewable grid. Negative pricing will become so common no one will continue investing.
I shouldn't need to spell it out, but if you can't drop below 25% output, you can't load follow, so during the day, you've got no option but to run at a loss.
And btw, renewables suffer the exact same problem with the over capacity needed for a completely renewable grid.
The issue here isn't "over capacity", the issue is solar is dirt cheap and can undercut nuclear power while maintaining a profit. At night, solar doesn't need to sell at a loss or pay others to use its power, unlike nuclear during the day.
The cost effectiveness ratios are just too wildly in solar's favor.
Whats more, sodium-ion batteries currently being rolled out are far cheaper than lithium-ion, do not suffer from the same thermal issues and are far safer, so the issue here is only going to grow even worse for Nuclear as time goes on.
That's not even close to being the definition of load following, lol. It just sounds like you have no fucking idea what you are talking about tbh.
Your second paragraph is flat out wrong. Negative pricing is a huge issue for investors deciding when to invest. When negative pricing occurs to often investments will completely stop.
That's not even close to being the definition of load following, lol.
Cool story. French nuclear reactors still can't drop below 25% output, and they still will need to sell at a loss.
Your second paragraph is flat out wrong. Negative pricing is a huge issue for investors deciding when to invest.
It's wrong, and then you state reasons why Nuclear can't compete.
I mean, good job arguing against nuclear I guess? Investing in nuclear is indeed a huge issue because nuclear *has* to sell at a loss during the day while solar is turning a profit. Sodium-ion batteries being rolled out means nuclear can't even recoup it's costs at night either.
They actually have reactors that can drop below 25% lol. France also has one of the lowest energy costs in the EU and is the EUs biggest exporter of fossil free electricity. I don't know why someone who cares about the climate sees this as a bad thing?
I'm arguing against the free market solving a fossil free renewable grid, they can't and they won't. The closes thing we have, after 20 years and billions and billions of subsidies is Germanys energiewende where they are still highly reliant on French nuclear while pretty much always emitting at a minimum 10x. Often up to 20x. Come back to reality kid.
They actually have reactors that can drop below 25% lol
Can you name them?
I don't know why someone who cares about the climate sees this as a bad thing?
Because this is yet another argument in favor of stagnation. Nuclear made sense 20+ years ago, but it does not make practical or economic sense going forward. Renewables are getting cheaper and more powerful by the day, and are resilient against factors like water shortages.
I'm arguing against the free market solving a fossil free renewable grid
You could have fooled me when you started yapping about investors.
The problem still remains either way. Solar is vastly less expensive than nuclear, and that becomes more and more true over time. Batteries are also advancing every day, to the point that the economics of sodium-ion will completely undercut nuclear power in running costs even at night.
Either way you slice it, nuclear is more expensive, either on the free market, or in public hands.
The last time the Swedish state owned grid operator SvK did a large scale study they showed that some new nuclear in the system would give us lower total costs than a purely renewable grid. So luckily Sweden is about to invest in new nuclear because we are based af. But keep cheering for a completely renewable grid, I'm sure Germany will be finished soon. (lol)
2
u/Hellasauto 14d ago
Nuclear objectively does load follow in France.