> You're saying that modern solar panels produce the same output on cloudy days that they do on sunny ones?
Who said that?
> At what cost per MWh, including government subsidies?
No government subsidies.
Westinghouse Electric declared bankruptcy over the Vogtle nuclear plant in discussion. The U.S. government has given $8.3 billion of loan guarantees to help finance construction of the Vogtle reactor.
So yeah, at what cost per MWh is a great question. Someone should do the math. And the math should include the loan guarantees and the bankruptcy costs.
No one claimed that solar panels produce the same output on cloudy days as sunny days. The claim was that solar panels have become efficient enough to not need sunny California type climate in order to be viable. Two very different claims.
Companies investing in large scale commercial solar plants in the cloudy UK at the north of the planet, for profit, and without subsidies, proves that this is true.
Meanwhile Westinghouse Electric declared bankruptcy trying to finish the Vogtle nuclear power plant in discussion. 90% of nameplate capacity doesn't mean much at all if you can't afford to finish building the thing.
> 90% of nameplate capacity doesn't mean much at all if you can't afford to finish building the thing.
Tell you what: get back to me when someone actually builds one of your fantasy solar power plants at a competitive cost (which will involve multiplying the nameplate capacity by 9).
But we need to keep civilization running until then. Sorry.
> get back to me when someone actually builds one of your fantasy solar power plants at a competitive cost (which will involve multiplying the nameplate capacity by 9).
Hey! I'm already back with proof positive results!
NextEra energy has installed over 45,500Mw of renewable energy and their earnings per share are 1.30. This all happened while the latest nuclear build put the builder into bankruptcy, yo!
They are - get this - the world's largest utility company.
Their future plans do include continuing running existing nuclear plants. But: they have zero plans to build new nuclear. Their plans do include building LOADS of new solar. Can you explain why a for-profit company would be taking this direction if solar is not competitive? You cannot. Solar is getting cheaper and more efficient by the year. It's the smarter choice if you are into making money. Nuclear is the smarter choice if you want to declare bankruptcy.
Lots more where NextEra came from.
> But we need to keep civilization running until then. Sorry.
We are. 1/5 of all the solar installed in the US was installed just last year. Your beloved nuclear is slowing fading into history while solar plants go up everywhere you look. Sorry! Even France knows the deal and will rely far less on nuclear in the coming years.
Didn't you say we were done here? Twice? What happened?
"Can operate" is a different thing from "can operate at the claimed efficiency".
You're saying that modern solar panels produce the same output on cloudy days that they do on sunny ones?
I don't think so.
> Cleve Hill solar farm in the UK was approved in 2020 and will generate 350MW.
At what cost per MWh, including government subsidies?