by natmaka | 2026-01-31 17:21:57+00:00
> capacity factors

Deeming dispatchable power necessary was valid as long as the technical means (long-distance, high-capacity transmission, smart grids, energy storage, network management software capable of reacting quickly enough and optimizing the system, voltage stabilization and current frequency synthesis tools, etc.) that would have allowed for a mostly non-dispatchable way to generate electricity were too expensive, insufficient, or simply nonexistent.

Now these means exist, and experts assert that it is no longer necessary to deploy a large proportion of dispatchable generation capacity. Therefore, from a technical standpoint, an electrical system based on renewables with the largest resources (wind and solar, which are not dispatchable) is feasible: https://cleantechnica.com/2022/07/25/will-renewable-energy-d...

> compare to solar projects

"With the cost of storing electricity at $65/MWh, storing 50% of a day’s solar generation for use during the night-time hours adds $33/MWh to the total cost of solar. The global average price of solar in 2024 was $43/MWh. Turning this cheap daytime electricity into a dispatchable profile that is closer to an actual demand profile, would therefore result in a total electricity cost of $76/MWh."
https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/how-cheap-is-batter...

The total cost of nuclear power, even when building and managing waste without exceeding the budget, even without accidents, even without uranium supply problems..., is already much higher than that.

He's dead, Jim.

> 2- announcement
> plans will probably accelerate

Indeed, let's see if the current trend will be reversed: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-fossil-renewa...

> Why should I read a nonsensical antinuclear article by a rando on the internet

It is sourced (or you may pinpoint what isn't).

> when there are official numbers from court of auditors?

The referenced article quotes thems!

> even if you bump them by 50%, it'll still be cheaper than german EEG expenditure alone

The cost of the energy transition in Germany is sometimes cited as €300 billion, €500 billion, or even €1.5 trillion.

These figures are worthless because no reputable source publishes a specific figure along with its scope (some aspects of the investments needed for the electricity grid are independent of the energy source) and at least a timeframe.

These figures are actually projections published by various sources, covering distant timeframes (2050, etc.) and encompassing the entire electricity system (including non-renewable energy sources).

We had the same sort of propaganda in France, then EDF (Big Chief of the French nuclear sector) boss stated in public that about 50% of the projected network-related costs are not tied to renewables ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEdQz3hGlf0&t=328s ).

> "This nuclearization lasted approximately 40 years." But messmer plan took much less.

Nope: https://sites.google.com/view/electricitedefrance/messmer-pl...

> Numbers are known in both cases and you clearly want to ignore them.

The afore-referenced articles states and sources facts and data. You don't.

> Talking about french prosperous period when DE is biggest EU economy

'Prosperous' is more-or-less 'density', not extension. This past prosperity (massively benefitting to the Messmer Plan) is an historical indeniable fact ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trente_Glorieuses ).

> gas plants
> hydrogen when merely 25% mix is already worse economically than failed nuclear projects like Vogtle

This is not valid as in this context those hydrogen plants are prototypes, while Vogtle (and other recent projects aiming at building nuclear reactors) are theoritically mastered since the 1970's (Messmer Plan...).

> The announced gas plants dont match the numbers demanded by Fraunhofer, mostly because EU rules dont allow that. So basically germany is stuck in a strange position where it needs firming but it cannot build it.

Indeed, and it may imply that more coal will be burnt. This is ridiculous.

> magical cheap hydrogen

This is indeed a bet, but a non-inept one ( https://www.spglobal.com/energy/en/news-research/latest-news... ), especially as the amount of electricity overproduced by renewables, reflected by episodes of low or even negative spot prices, is constantly increasing.