lotstodo
aka "The Jackal"
Below is an article covering a research paper that studies the actual costs of different primary and backup energy production combinations. It uncovers a quirk that many no-nuke and pro-wind groups have been passing around lately, and this is that wind with natural gas backup is cheaper than nuclear plus natural gas backup. This is true, but only because the wind system requires twice the backup capacity and use, so in effect, you are comparing the cost of natural gas to nuclear when you make this claim.
The elephant in the room is of course that all alternative production with the exception of geothermal requires backup, and geothermal is considered a limited region alternative. Nuclear requires backup because of load changes, as a nuclear plant must run at full capacity all the time to be practical, and is difficult to take offline and restart. Thus nuclear cannot be the only form of production. Wind and solar require backup for the both load and generation capacity, as they cannot be throttled efficiently either (particularly solar), their production capacity is often inverse to load, and their production capacity is not under man's control. As a general rule, they require twice the capacity of nuclear. Fossil fuel plants are designed to be throttled and even taken off grid as required, with a startup time that is reasonable for daily production.
Anyway, there is a link to the paper. The peer reviewed and published version, which is substantially the same as the unedited working paper which is free, is behind a pay firewall. There are links to both in the article.
https://judithcurry.com/2017/12/14/...il-fuels-some-evidence-from-texas/#more-23687
The elephant in the room is of course that all alternative production with the exception of geothermal requires backup, and geothermal is considered a limited region alternative. Nuclear requires backup because of load changes, as a nuclear plant must run at full capacity all the time to be practical, and is difficult to take offline and restart. Thus nuclear cannot be the only form of production. Wind and solar require backup for the both load and generation capacity, as they cannot be throttled efficiently either (particularly solar), their production capacity is often inverse to load, and their production capacity is not under man's control. As a general rule, they require twice the capacity of nuclear. Fossil fuel plants are designed to be throttled and even taken off grid as required, with a startup time that is reasonable for daily production.
Anyway, there is a link to the paper. The peer reviewed and published version, which is substantially the same as the unedited working paper which is free, is behind a pay firewall. There are links to both in the article.
https://judithcurry.com/2017/12/14/...il-fuels-some-evidence-from-texas/#more-23687