Fla3 min profitability limit is 9ct and expected limit is about 12-14ct. And mind you 9ct scenario assumes 90%cf, while most US plants are 92-98%cf.
And that's for a totally f-up project... EPR2 isn't built yet so we don't know how it'll go per kwh, if EDF doesn't delay it for 20y it'll be in 6-10ct range, similar to Barakah built by Korea
Most of the cost in ren nowadays is transmission cost and firming cost, both don't have a big margin to shave, unlike nuclear
> Fla3 min profitability limit is 9ct and expected limit is about 12-14ct.
When assuming extremely subsidised interest rates. You can do the same for the competition to get an apples to apples comparison, but I know you don't want to do that.
> And that's for a totally f-up project... EPR2 isn't built yet so we don't know how it'll go per kwh, if EDF doesn't delay it for 20y it'll be in 6-10ct range, similar to Barakah built by Korea
The EPR2 subsidy proposal, yet to be accepted by the european commission, is 11 cents/kWh and interest free loans. Sum freely. Stop making stuff up.
> Most of the cost in ren nowadays is transmission cost and firming cost, both don't have a big margin to shave, unlike nuclear
How will you force anyone to buy that horrifyingly expensive new built nuclear electricity?
No, fla3 interest rates weren't that subsidized. It would require EC approval like the EPR2 project.
I didn't make stuff up. Profitability limit would be 6-10ct, the cfds would be above that
You don't need to force anyone to buy nuclear. People will pay for electricity. In some cases price will be more influenced by the source like nuclear if it's expensive. In other cases it'll be influenced by transmission, grid forming inverters and firming costs
SA is one of the leaders in ren deployment. Just like CA. Just like Germany. All are dwarfed by france for cheap household prices. That's because even if lcoe for ren is cheap, full system cost grows
> No, fla3 interest rates weren't that subsidized.
You have a study you've linked several times in the past arguing how cheap FV3 is based on insanely subsidized interest rates and a payoff time stretching almost into 2100 if an equivalent project was started today.
> It would require EC approval like the EPR2 project.
Much has changed since 2006.
> People will pay for electricity. In some cases price will be more influenced by the source like nuclear if it's expensive. In other cases it'll be influenced by transmission, grid forming inverters and firming costs
What do you do when the grid demand for firm power is zero? Shut down the nuclear plant?
> All are dwarfed by france for cheap household prices.
About the entire difference comes from extra fees and taxes. The wholesale day ahead prices are about equal.
That is also running on the French paid off nuclear fleet nearing EOL. How will you get the current wholesale prices with the EDF2 fleet costing 11 cents/kWh and interest free loans?
The costs doesn't dissappear simply because you hide them in the tax budget.
> That's because even if lcoe for ren is cheap, full system cost grows
You have to look at it coming from the raw incentives. You can complain all you want about "full system cost", but that only applies in an monopolized system where the consumers don't have any choice.
Consumers have choices and can pick and choose what of the monopolized system they want by implementing their own distributed renewable generation and storage.
And that's for a totally f-up project... EPR2 isn't built yet so we don't know how it'll go per kwh, if EDF doesn't delay it for 20y it'll be in 6-10ct range, similar to Barakah built by Korea
Most of the cost in ren nowadays is transmission cost and firming cost, both don't have a big margin to shave, unlike nuclear