Various studies on future low-carbon electricity mixes suggest that the least expensive option is one with nuclear along with solar and wind mixed in. But the economists overlook the cost impact of ramping. Craig Morris takes a look. In 2016, PwC produced a 41-page study for the Belgian Nuclear Forum (available in Dutch and French). It investigates three scenarios with the goal of finding the least expensive one: no nuclear, 3 GW of nuclear, and 6 GW of nuclear. The share of wind and solar power in all scenarios is the same: roughly 28% wind power and 5.9% solar in 2030. In recent years, Belgium has generated around 80 TWh of electricity but imported another 10 TWh, putting demand closer to PwC’s base year figure of 90 TWh. The European transmission grid operator network (Entso-e) puts the share of solar in Belgium at 4.7% in 2015 (see map below) and wind power at 8.2%. In contrast, Febag, the association Belgian electricity and gas providers, has only 3.7% solar and 6.4% wind in 2016. The share … Continue reading How to make nuclear look cheap: use sloppy economics