Comment by mpweiher
5 months ago
> Let’s begin with concluding that you could not find a source for your claims.
The source is the report by the French Cour des Comptes. I am not your research assistant.
> I find it interesting how someone so smart can just lie through their teeth.
I find it interesting that you have no arguments left and have to resort to ad-hominem attacks.
And thank you for confirming my point:
>off shore wind is right on the cusp of viability.
Meaning the very best off-shore wind projects may or may not be profitable. We don't know yet.
Whereas the worst French nuclear project in recent history (FV3) is predicted by the Cour des Comptes to have "modest" profitability in the worst case scenarios.
So once again: worst nuclear >> best intermittent renewable.
QED.
The report with a discount rate lower than the inflation and a 40 year pay back time.
For anyone even having a slight economic understanding the writers of that report are shouting from the top of their lungs that investing in nuclear power is pure lunacy.
But shrouded in a language allowing lobbyists and blindingly biased people to cite it.
Any understanding of economy and shilling for nuclear power seems to be a very disjoint set given what we are seeing in this thread.
"Interesting" unsubstantiated opinions.
And counterfactual, as nuclear is immensely profitable and the world is investing in nuclear.
Here’s the source Cour des Comptes report validating that you are incorrect.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45243337
The world also very much is not investing in nuclear power given how it is backsliding as a % of the global energy mix with a huge number of closures looming in the close future with no replacements in sight.
Given this answer I don’t know if you are either trolling or have serious problems with delusions.
I dislike drawing conclusions so I will end this conversion with a question:
If you are not trolling, have you tried seeking help from the mental healthcare system?
6 replies →