Report of the Court of Auditors on nuclear energy

[netshaman]

Tuesday January 31, Éva Joly convened a press conference to comment on the report of the Court of Auditors on nuclear power. The aim of this report, The Costs of the nuclear power industry, was to establish a costed, precise and exhaustive diagnosis on the cost of nuclear energy. An unprecedented exercise for the Court of Auditors, which is a first step towards opening a real debate on the question of the atom.

Accompanied by Michèle Rivasi, Euro-MP, spokesperson for her campaign, and Denis Baupin, deputy mayor of Paris, the candidate stressed that in terms of energy, "the time for choice has come."

This report dispels the third myth which edified France's subservience to nuclear energy. After the myth of energy independence, after the myth of safe technology, it is now the myth of cheap nuclear energy that is collapsing.

Thanks to this report, we now know that nuclear energy has already cost France 228 billion euros. It is also established that the electricity produced by the Flamanville EPR, if it sees the light of day, will be more expensive than that produced by a wind turbine. And that in order to extend the life of the power plants, 50 billion euros will have to be invested, which is added to the 10 billion needed to bring the plants up to Fukushima standards.

"From today, a choice is imperative for the French: to continue on a ruinous path or to engage in the energy transition".

In addition, the environmental candidate insisted on the uncertainty concerning the costs of dismantling or waste management, uncertainty highlighted by the Court of Auditors.

“We are totally ignorant when it comes to dismantling. Just look at the English experience. The unknown but already prohibitive costs of these operations can only enlighten us on the road to follow: the choice of the energy transition ”.

“Finland, populated for 9 years, will have to pay for its waste for hundreds of thousands of years. The choice before us today is not only ours, but also that of the generations to come. ”

Why am I not surprised by this?
I always said that it was a financial abyss!

[Flytox]

Excellent, even pronuke who pretend to be honest will find it difficult to challenge the very official Court of Auditors who says that costs are only competitive compared to renewable.

Bright confirmation that the nuke is the energy of the past...... that we will drag like a ball for our future.

[chatelot16]

while we are in the accounts, or is it flamanville?

what proportion of its total cost is already spent?

should it be finished or abandoned?

if the expenditure incurred is limited is it not yet time to invest the rest in better ways?

[netshaman]

Oh it's easy if you just multiply by three or four the initial budget!
Like in Norway!

Bright confirmation that the nuke is the energy of the past ...... that we will drag like a ball for our future. Evil or Very Mad

1 +!
Normal for an energy fossil !
In the 70s it could be considered a futuristic energy, but now it is outdated.
It 's a bit like IT: who wants a Univac 1 today?


Besides, there is a saying that sums it up well:

"Yesterday's wonders are today's mud piles, and today's wonders will be tomorrow's mud piles!"



On BFM TV I saw a report which said roughly that France was obliged to buy energy in Germany produced by photovoltaic which was the equivalent of 8 nuclear reactors and that the cost price was cheaper by 5 cts kw / h.
All this because of winter for fear of a blackout.
It's funny because afterwards there is the Minister of Energy who claimed that "it is thanks to our nuclear park that we are going to get by!" (blackout)
So why tell people to avoid overeating for fear of having a blackout?
If this is not misinformation ca!
Has the Court of Auditors taken into account (!) The purchase of energy from abroad also?
Otherwise, ben will have to increase the bill!

And do you know why they strive to extend the life of power plants?
Well, it's simple: they haven't finished paying them!
Must make the most of it!
Then we wonder where the debt comes from!

[Obamot]

Why am I not surprised by this?
I always said that it was a financial abyss!

And again ... the Court of Auditors undoubtedly did not want to bury it for socio-political questions. As a result, even if the report claimed to be "neutral", it is still strangely "tinted". Thus, the long-term impact with costs such as those linked to low-dose irradiation and land frozen for thousands of years due to Chernobyl as well as the costs to control these areas as well as those of storage , will not have been addressed (indeed, as soon as France imports energy for nuclear part, it is co-responsible for the share of these costs there ... no one can predict the type of xxxxCRATIE that 'we will have, if only in five thousand years ...)

On BFM TV I saw a report which said roughly that France was obliged to buy energy in Germany produced by photovoltaic which was the equivalent of 8 nuclear reactors and that the cost price was cheaper by 5 cts kw / h.

Above all, it must not be confessed that the main arguments that would supposedly justify nuclear power fall apart, such as: (a) there is no "security of supply" when one is forced to import of the current ... (aa) the real cost, (aaa) the atomic energy which had to allow to produce cheap to export expensive ... (aaaa) the depreciation of the power stations, etc, etc ...

So why tell people to avoid overeating for fear of having a blackout?
If this is not misinformation ca!

It is to export energy during peaks in consumption, but the other less nuclearised countries do not need it, since they are precisely exporters in these time slots ...

In short, finally atomic energy also has its own pans, like that of producing permanently, therefore of being "demanding" to sell unused power ...
On the other hand, to get out of nuclear power, you will need a real Marshall plan for renewable energies, because we cannot deny either that the consumption peaks of this winter are very real, and we must also heat up ...

Replacing what exists is a challenge. It is necessary to start as soon as possible at the risk of becoming an importer or of making other converted countries take nuclear risks, impossible to assume for example those linked to the hypothesis of accident (s) on aging power stations which have become still less "safe" ...

[netshaman]

that of producing permanently, therefore of being "requesting" to sell unused power ...

In short it is a waste what ...
No wonder at all given that we are in a society of overconsumption!

[moinsdewatt]

while we are in the accounts, or is it flamanville?

what proportion of its total cost is already spent?

should it be finished or abandoned?

if the expenditure incurred is limited is it not yet time to invest the rest in better ways?

It's been at least 6 months since I read that the expense incurred was more than 50%.

We must finish this EPR, of course.

[dedeleco]

This excess price is mainly to make it flexible fast according to actual consumption, without redoing a new Chernobyl, by operating at low power for a long time (poisoning the reactor), cause of Chernobyl, and it is so difficult if not impossible, that the price explodes !!

[Flytox]

This excess price is mainly to make it flexible fast according to real consumption, without redoing a new Chernobyl, by operating at low power for a long time (poisoning of the reactor), cause of Chernobyl, and it is so difficult if not impossible, the price explodes !!

As long as it is only the price that explodes, it is a lesser evil.

[Did67]

Peak of cold; import / export ... A good summary, based a priori on good data here:

http://sciences.blogs.liberation.fr/hom ... nsion.html