Comment by ViewTrick1002

> I'm just more pragmatic and fully realise that renewable aren't sufficient in the short-medium term.

Which is why we should lock in the solution not delivering a single new kWh until the mid 2040s. Sounds reasonable?

You should also read some research on the topic before again coming with falsehoods. The scientific consensus is that renewable systems works.

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9837910

> The funny thing is that I'm not saying we shouldn't do renewables, just that we also need to keep investing in nuclear, at the very least to insure minimal base load for the bad weather periods.

Which tells me you don't understand how the grid works. Why should someone with rooftop solar and a home battery buy your extremely expensive nuclear powered electricity when they are swimming in their own?

Well. They don't. Meaning capacity factors crater.

Should we calculate what running Flamanville 3 at a 40% equivalent capacity factor costs? We are now somewhere around 35 cents per kWh excluding transmission cost.

Then three paragraphs of personal attacks to round it off because the nuclear logic does not compute.