Hacker News Reader

For the record, it’s usually criticized dependent on the individual’s views on intermittent vs. non-intermittent… Just as green hydrogen is heavily criticized by skeptics vs advocates…

It’s not criticized broadly by the entire energy industry…

Can you please link to some of that criticism? Lazard's numbers have been criticized because they make nuclear power look noncompetitive, but that doesn't mean that the numbers are wrong.

You see that's the thing though.

From the nuclear stan's point of view nuclear is cheapest and best, and anything that contradicts that is wrong by definition.

Thinking tap water and rain water don't have the same value makes one a nuclear stan?

Telling the same lies over and over again does.

They are not wrong, they are incomplete. For intermittent sources, you need to factor in not only storage, but also grid upgrades and interconnects. Somethings LCOE overlooks.

It's the same thing as saying rain water is cheaper than tap water.

Having Roland Berger as co-authors of this study is not very confidence-inducing, either.