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

[Christophe]

The LCOE (levelized cost of electricity) is actually a relatively standardized calculation which is interested in a project future, which has not emerged from the ground, based on a number of technical and financial assumptions which may or may not be verified in the life of the project

Uh ... wild !!!

[Bardal]

Well yes, this "cost" of electricity published by Lazard has nothing to do with the real cost of electricity produced by such and such means. It is simply the measure of the theoretical risk taken by a bank in the investments it makes, under given political and economic conditions, at a given time.
It is clear that photovoltaics, which has a state purchase guarantee and a double-digit return on investment in Europe, is an investment that is immediately very profitable, and therefore without risk for a bank. Nuclear power, on the other hand, has a long-term profitability, with an investment that is not immediately profitable, and will be much less attractive for a bank; this is what explains the price per kWh calculated and negotiated for EDF EPRs in England, where the economy is completely liberal.

All this makes sense only for a purely liberal economy, and essentially measures the distortion of competition introduced into the energy market by renewable energy subsidies. Otherwise, we would have to believe that EDF has been selling its electricity at a loss (42 € per MWh) for 20 years, a loss that would be 2 times greater than the revenues of this company, which is obviously absurd ... We would also have to believe that the Cour des comptes is made up of choirboys, who calculated a cost per nuclear kWh much more in line with the market price. In short, it would have to be concluded that recent history never existed, and that everything is only an illusion. The LCOE has only a very distant relationship with 1- the real cost price 2- the market price ...

Incidentally, since this thread already old speaks of it on several occasions, the State subsidies to nuclear power to my knowledge only concern the 500 million that the State pays to the CEA each year, compensated € for € by the special nuclear tax that EDF pays every year. On the other hand, EDF pays annually between 1 and 2 billion dividends to its shareholder the State .... We must stop peddling rumors without supporting them with evidence, or at least evidence ...

ps the depreciation of the construction of power plants is obviously included in the cost price per kWh (this is not very important). The updating of the cost of this investment weighs much more heavily, and will be totally dependent on "economic" assumptions restrained ...

[Remundo]

apparently, some have a remarkable inventiveness to discredit figures which do not suit them.

If they like numbers, they had better be interested in EDF-Areva's debts.

[sicetaitsimple]

apparently, some have a remarkable inventiveness to discredit figures which do not suit them.

If they like numbers, they had better be interested in EDF-Areva's debts.

The exercise is interesting, it is not a question of figures which please or not, but the assumptions count.

My intervention was just to tell Christophe that you shouldn't compare to market prices. The best proof by the absurd, since it is necessary to be interested in the debt of EDF, is that if EDF sold its nuclear MWh to the LCOE (say 100 € / MWh, instead of 40 approximately), not only the company would have no debt but it would be very rich!

[Meszigues3]

you may not like Lazard, but when it comes to investments and financial analysis, it's their job and they're not bad.

network management externalities are also a cost with nuclear power.

It doesn't matter if I like Lazard or not; what does this irrational argument do here?

Of course, management externalities are also a cost with nuclear power, except that collecting energy from wind turbines sprinkled over km² is more costly.

But that is nothing compared to the need for storage and redundancy of investments in emergency power plants for windless days.
The wind load factor of the Lazard report is enormous: 55% !
Maybe 55% are found in Labrador or Guatemala, but in Europe it's less than half, which doubles the cost of wind power.

[Meszigues3]

The industrial purchase price may be less than € 100 / MWh
... and on powernext (which no longer manages electricity now ...) I saw the MWh at less than € 10 / MWh (January 1st!) ... so less than 1 cts / kWh .. .but it's the energy market, not the fundamental prices.

When there is too much wind, Germany is forced to sell at negative prices (the producer pays to get rid of its uncontrollable renewable energy production).
- € 81,95 / MWh on 29/10/2017 at 12:00 p.m.
http://www.epexspot.com/fr/donnees_de_marche/dayaheadfixing/graphe/auction-chart/2017-10-29/DE

EU statistics on the price of electricity: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics ... did=291900

These are rates, not costs.

[Bardal]

apparently, some have a remarkable inventiveness to discredit figures which do not suit them.

If they like numbers, they had better be interested in EDF-Areva's debts.

But ... They are also interested in EDF-Areva debts.
On the other hand, they love to correct the words of those who comment on figures without having understood what it is all about ... It is a healthy job, of collective interest, of setting the record straight ...

Finally, but this is irrelevant, it would be necessary to know whether the satisfaction of the basic needs of the citizens must come from a banking logic, therefore liberal, or from a regulated collective logic. If the answer is banking logic, you will have to abandon all kinds of things, such as Social Security, pension plans, SNCF, Security and Fire Services, but also all subsidies for renewable energies, among others. .. If the answer is a regulated collective logic, then goodbye to the LCOE and to Lazard's calculations (this dear old Lazard ...). Colbert, a few centuries ago, already understood this ...

PS On another subject addressed by the fi: "externalities" exist for all means of energy production; for the moment, they are not counted, for none, this is even why they are called externalities ... The picture of the so-called Lazard would obviously be upset if indeed we counted the victims of CO2 emissions and pollution various emitted by - for example - European lignite power stations ... But that's a joke ...

[Remundo]

oh nucleuses, you can talk about the externalities ... between nuclear accidents, uninhabitable land and the dismantling of facilities, for sure that you will get out at a competitive price !!

[Christophe]

When there is too much wind, Germany is forced to sell at negative prices (the producer pays to get rid of its uncontrollable renewable energy production).
- € 81,95 / MWh on 29/10/2017 at 12:00 p.m.
http://www.epexspot.com/fr/donnees_de_marche/dayaheadfixing/graphe/auction-chart/2017-10-29/DE

EU statistics on the price of electricity: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics ... did=291900

These are rates, not costs.

Yes absolutely and a price is, logically, higher than a cost ...

The example you cite is relevant but anecdotal!

ps: the "uncontrollable" is a bit biased, right?

[Christophe]

oh nucleuses, you can talk about the externalities ... between nuclear accidents, uninhabitable land and the dismantling of facilities, for sure that you will get out at a competitive price !!

... and Remundo waste, waste! Ultimately, this is probably the biggest problem ...

Like big kids (or ostriches?) They only have the solution to bury them and let them rot ...