That’s not what happens with next-gen renewables —- they are modular and can be built much faster and much cheaper.
New build nuclear is not cost competitive with new build wind and solar (even when you account for firming costs), and the cost of wind and solar is still falling at an astonishing rate.
> New build nuclear is not cost competitive with new build wind and solar (even when you account for firming costs), and the cost of wind and solar is still falling at an astonishing rate.
The future will tell, as it is now, Germany already spent more on renewable than the total French nuclear industry, even when you add decommissioning and with the bad results we know. Maybe countries should learn on the German mistakes? Also the renewables built to replace the nuclear plants in France are pointed out for being far over-budget as well.
The cost studies for renewable tend to remove a lot of external costs in order to make them appear cheaper than they are.
Germany already spent more on renewable than the total French nuclear industry
Source? What does that even mean? Where'd you find an honest assessment of the regulatory and construction costs for France's nuclear power plants, much less a sensible estimate for decommissioning plants that are still running? Does it include research and development in either case? Does it include maintenance, personnel, fuel, cleanup, storage of spent fuel both temporarily and long term?
Germany spent around around 250 billions euros since 2005 on renewables [1]. The french nuclear energy (total) had a cost of 228 billions euros [2]. Renewables are not nearly as cheap as people make you believe, they do have a lot of external costs.
