That Lazard presentation gets quoted quite a bit. There's a problem with it though: if things were so rosy, they'd happen in real life. You wouldn't get any energy shortages. Smart businessmen would just build those solar panels and wind turbines, and make a nice profit and also become environmental heroes in the process.
To some extend this is happening. California for example [1] had 1 GW or installed solar capacity in 2010, 13 GW in 2015 and 31 GW in 2020. But California is at a much lower latitude than any place in Europe (the average latitude in Europe is about 57 degrees, in California about 37 degrees). And it's also sunny.
Lazard doesn't say what region their LCOE is based on, maybe it's a global average. But then it's going to be biased towards southern latitudes by the simple fact that that's where most solar installations happen. And they happen there, because that's where they are profitable.
Separately, the LCOE does not take into consideration the fluctuations in the energy produced. And that's quite a big deal for solar and wind.
So, sure, new nuclear power plants are not economical, but just operating existing ones? In Europe, that most surely is.
The Lazard presentation isn’t some kind of rosy green energy fantasy, it’s written for energy investors who are making decisions today. Investors don’t give a damn about shortages, and will happily undercut everyone else’s business model if they can sell the cheapest energy the 95% of the time the wind is blowing.
To some extend this is happening. California for example [1] had 1 GW or installed solar capacity in 2010, 13 GW in 2015 and 31 GW in 2020. But California is at a much lower latitude than any place in Europe (the average latitude in Europe is about 57 degrees, in California about 37 degrees). And it's also sunny.
Lazard doesn't say what region their LCOE is based on, maybe it's a global average. But then it's going to be biased towards southern latitudes by the simple fact that that's where most solar installations happen. And they happen there, because that's where they are profitable.
Separately, the LCOE does not take into consideration the fluctuations in the energy produced. And that's quite a big deal for solar and wind.
So, sure, new nuclear power plants are not economical, but just operating existing ones? In Europe, that most surely is.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_California#Phot...