Post Normal Times
@barinemiliano.bsky.social
Electricity markets⚡📈
Decarbonisation🌍🔌
Nuclear deployment ⚛️
Renewables' integration ♻️
Occasionally: unwarranted societal commentary🏙️ movies & series posting🎬
https://postnormaltimes.substack.com
https://chalk-spectrum-b6f.notion.site/52bd5bca66554088bc3e
Decarbonisation🌍🔌
Nuclear deployment ⚛️
Renewables' integration ♻️
Occasionally: unwarranted societal commentary🏙️ movies & series posting🎬
https://postnormaltimes.substack.com
https://chalk-spectrum-b6f.notion.site/52bd5bca66554088bc3e
Anyone with a decent enough knowledge of LCOE calculations immediately understands that, to reach such a figure, very high WACCs or low CFs were assumed
Examples from previous years' analyses confirm this, and the rather brash and superficial response from BNEF team is telling
x.com/BarinEmilian...
Examples from previous years' analyses confirm this, and the rather brash and superficial response from BNEF team is telling
x.com/BarinEmilian...
Post Normal Times on X: "@BlanchardA92663 @janrosenow BNEF team confirmed this and gave a rather superficial rationale https://t.co/o72N9kcwGr https://t.co/7ehcgXy0qR" / X
@BlanchardA92663 @janrosenow BNEF team confirmed this and gave a rather superficial rationale https://t.co/o72N9kcwGr https://t.co/7ehcgXy0qR
x.com
August 28, 2025 at 10:12 AM
Anyone with a decent enough knowledge of LCOE calculations immediately understands that, to reach such a figure, very high WACCs or low CFs were assumed
Examples from previous years' analyses confirm this, and the rather brash and superficial response from BNEF team is telling
x.com/BarinEmilian...
Examples from previous years' analyses confirm this, and the rather brash and superficial response from BNEF team is telling
x.com/BarinEmilian...
Correct on all fronts! Sizewell C is expensive and there are legitimate concerns regarding market competitiveness (less so with a deep decarbonization goal), but throwing around higher figures without any kind of reasoning or explanation is deeply problematic from @financialtimes.com and BNEF 🔌💡
August 28, 2025 at 10:12 AM
Correct on all fronts! Sizewell C is expensive and there are legitimate concerns regarding market competitiveness (less so with a deep decarbonization goal), but throwing around higher figures without any kind of reasoning or explanation is deeply problematic from @financialtimes.com and BNEF 🔌💡
We don't disagree on the competitiveness of further REN expansion or their central role in future grids compared to "business-as-usual" (even with revenue guarantees and larger grid investments), but I think a fairer comparison would be against a REN+nuclear (or other scalable firm low-c) scenario
August 27, 2025 at 3:42 PM
We don't disagree on the competitiveness of further REN expansion or their central role in future grids compared to "business-as-usual" (even with revenue guarantees and larger grid investments), but I think a fairer comparison would be against a REN+nuclear (or other scalable firm low-c) scenario
Yes, there's a very narrow path through a consortium approach that spreads FOAK and non-recurring costs across multiple units (🇪🇺 far from such a strategy, some movement in the US)
Markets are also highlighting that further VRE investments will require revenue guarantees and higher grid strengthening
Markets are also highlighting that further VRE investments will require revenue guarantees and higher grid strengthening
August 27, 2025 at 2:44 PM
Yes, there's a very narrow path through a consortium approach that spreads FOAK and non-recurring costs across multiple units (🇪🇺 far from such a strategy, some movement in the US)
Markets are also highlighting that further VRE investments will require revenue guarantees and higher grid strengthening
Markets are also highlighting that further VRE investments will require revenue guarantees and higher grid strengthening
Building a couple dispersed reactors across Europe isn't how you get cheaper nuclear, I agree; on the overall competitiveness of the deal, I believe countries building nuclear at the moment will be glad to have done so come 2035-40
*if there's sustained effort regarding decarbonization, otherwise...
*if there's sustained effort regarding decarbonization, otherwise...
August 27, 2025 at 2:26 PM
Building a couple dispersed reactors across Europe isn't how you get cheaper nuclear, I agree; on the overall competitiveness of the deal, I believe countries building nuclear at the moment will be glad to have done so come 2035-40
*if there's sustained effort regarding decarbonization, otherwise...
*if there's sustained effort regarding decarbonization, otherwise...
Small nitpick is that what is true for Finland and Sweden (both benefit from high shares of low-carbon firm dispatchable legacy capacity) may not be true for countries with still a large fossil fleet
August 27, 2025 at 1:27 PM
Small nitpick is that what is true for Finland and Sweden (both benefit from high shares of low-carbon firm dispatchable legacy capacity) may not be true for countries with still a large fossil fleet
"Problems" with nuclear and getting it "right" doesn't really square with actual data...comments are welcome
bsky.app/profile/bari...
bsky.app/profile/bari...
🔌💡 RENEWABLES OR NUCLEAR?
This recent @montelnews.bsky.social article rekindled the flames of the everlasting debate about their compatibility and what a decarbonized electricity grid will be like
Debunking of common misconceptions, analysis of market data and relevant research; to read in full ⬇️
This recent @montelnews.bsky.social article rekindled the flames of the everlasting debate about their compatibility and what a decarbonized electricity grid will be like
Debunking of common misconceptions, analysis of market data and relevant research; to read in full ⬇️
August 26, 2025 at 7:48 AM
"Problems" with nuclear and getting it "right" doesn't really square with actual data...comments are welcome
bsky.app/profile/bari...
bsky.app/profile/bari...
Common dynamics relevant to the discussion, also highlighted by other studies' results, are:
- capacity of decarbonised thermal (mostly peakers and some CCGTs powered by low-carbon fuels) in both scenarios, also affected by global warming
- reliance on exports during peak load + system stress events
- capacity of decarbonised thermal (mostly peakers and some CCGTs powered by low-carbon fuels) in both scenarios, also affected by global warming
- reliance on exports during peak load + system stress events
July 3, 2025 at 3:58 PM
Common dynamics relevant to the discussion, also highlighted by other studies' results, are:
- capacity of decarbonised thermal (mostly peakers and some CCGTs powered by low-carbon fuels) in both scenarios, also affected by global warming
- reliance on exports during peak load + system stress events
- capacity of decarbonised thermal (mostly peakers and some CCGTs powered by low-carbon fuels) in both scenarios, also affected by global warming
- reliance on exports during peak load + system stress events
💯 This is an often understated aspect in energy transition discourse, while grid operators stress its importance
RTE analysis underscores exactly this: cold spells+wind droughts represent a much more severe stress to the system than heat waves+water droughts, in both low and high nuclear scenarios
RTE analysis underscores exactly this: cold spells+wind droughts represent a much more severe stress to the system than heat waves+water droughts, in both low and high nuclear scenarios
July 3, 2025 at 3:58 PM
💯 This is an often understated aspect in energy transition discourse, while grid operators stress its importance
RTE analysis underscores exactly this: cold spells+wind droughts represent a much more severe stress to the system than heat waves+water droughts, in both low and high nuclear scenarios
RTE analysis underscores exactly this: cold spells+wind droughts represent a much more severe stress to the system than heat waves+water droughts, in both low and high nuclear scenarios
N-1 contingency & weather variability aren't exclusive to REN or thermal
On future outlooks:
- granular analysis concludes 2-3x wrt today in relatively pessimistic 2050 scenario
- other than Rostov 2-4, all reactors built & planned by rivers since 2000 are systematically equipped with cooling towers
On future outlooks:
- granular analysis concludes 2-3x wrt today in relatively pessimistic 2050 scenario
- other than Rostov 2-4, all reactors built & planned by rivers since 2000 are systematically equipped with cooling towers
One of the studies I was hinting at quantifies historical & future droughts/heat-waves unavailability within the context of:
- high GW scenarios
- no retrofits / water management
- country with highest river site share
Definitely rare events of simultaneous outages, not seasonal unviability though
- high GW scenarios
- no retrofits / water management
- country with highest river site share
Definitely rare events of simultaneous outages, not seasonal unviability though
July 3, 2025 at 2:35 PM
N-1 contingency & weather variability aren't exclusive to REN or thermal
On future outlooks:
- granular analysis concludes 2-3x wrt today in relatively pessimistic 2050 scenario
- other than Rostov 2-4, all reactors built & planned by rivers since 2000 are systematically equipped with cooling towers
On future outlooks:
- granular analysis concludes 2-3x wrt today in relatively pessimistic 2050 scenario
- other than Rostov 2-4, all reactors built & planned by rivers since 2000 are systematically equipped with cooling towers
In the face of electrification and load growth, however, this is likely to shift EVEN WITH investments in clean firm resources: large renewable clusters, low-c fuels' hubs, bigger transmission lines
Ex: Grand Coulee hydro complex in BPA, Bhadla Solar Park corridor in 🇮🇳, on-shore wind + HVDC in 🇩🇰
Ex: Grand Coulee hydro complex in BPA, Bhadla Solar Park corridor in 🇮🇳, on-shore wind + HVDC in 🇩🇰
July 3, 2025 at 2:35 PM
In the face of electrification and load growth, however, this is likely to shift EVEN WITH investments in clean firm resources: large renewable clusters, low-c fuels' hubs, bigger transmission lines
Ex: Grand Coulee hydro complex in BPA, Bhadla Solar Park corridor in 🇮🇳, on-shore wind + HVDC in 🇩🇰
Ex: Grand Coulee hydro complex in BPA, Bhadla Solar Park corridor in 🇮🇳, on-shore wind + HVDC in 🇩🇰
What @gruberte.bsky.social is referring to is a grid contingency criterion ("enforced" by the relevant Balancing Authority/TSO) that applies to any component within the system, with the biggest requiring targeted planning: because of their individual size, nuclear reactors are indeed commonly "it"
July 3, 2025 at 2:35 PM
What @gruberte.bsky.social is referring to is a grid contingency criterion ("enforced" by the relevant Balancing Authority/TSO) that applies to any component within the system, with the biggest requiring targeted planning: because of their individual size, nuclear reactors are indeed commonly "it"
One of the studies I was hinting at quantifies historical & future droughts/heat-waves unavailability within the context of:
- high GW scenarios
- no retrofits / water management
- country with highest river site share
Definitely rare events of simultaneous outages, not seasonal unviability though
- high GW scenarios
- no retrofits / water management
- country with highest river site share
Definitely rare events of simultaneous outages, not seasonal unviability though
July 3, 2025 at 9:20 AM
One of the studies I was hinting at quantifies historical & future droughts/heat-waves unavailability within the context of:
- high GW scenarios
- no retrofits / water management
- country with highest river site share
Definitely rare events of simultaneous outages, not seasonal unviability though
- high GW scenarios
- no retrofits / water management
- country with highest river site share
Definitely rare events of simultaneous outages, not seasonal unviability though
Some of the research I cited above does get pretty granular wrt stress events, but I'm definitely looking forward to it!
Especially to quantify risk, as we can see how other commentators are already responding to such arguments
I'd weight next decades low-c investments vs 2100 worries very carefully
Especially to quantify risk, as we can see how other commentators are already responding to such arguments
I'd weight next decades low-c investments vs 2100 worries very carefully
July 2, 2025 at 8:12 PM
Some of the research I cited above does get pretty granular wrt stress events, but I'm definitely looking forward to it!
Especially to quantify risk, as we can see how other commentators are already responding to such arguments
I'd weight next decades low-c investments vs 2100 worries very carefully
Especially to quantify risk, as we can see how other commentators are already responding to such arguments
I'd weight next decades low-c investments vs 2100 worries very carefully
Notable mentions are ADAPT in France, Argonne NL + EPRI, work by China's Tsinghua Institute
I guess @gruberte.bsky.social I'd appreciate a quantitative rather than qualitative analysis (which you hinted at), because valid research so far hasn't pointed to the serious structural issues you mention
I guess @gruberte.bsky.social I'd appreciate a quantitative rather than qualitative analysis (which you hinted at), because valid research so far hasn't pointed to the serious structural issues you mention
July 2, 2025 at 7:54 PM
Notable mentions are ADAPT in France, Argonne NL + EPRI, work by China's Tsinghua Institute
I guess @gruberte.bsky.social I'd appreciate a quantitative rather than qualitative analysis (which you hinted at), because valid research so far hasn't pointed to the serious structural issues you mention
I guess @gruberte.bsky.social I'd appreciate a quantitative rather than qualitative analysis (which you hinted at), because valid research so far hasn't pointed to the serious structural issues you mention
Definitely, cited reduced flows somewhere else (which the analysis I linked counts)
I understand the broader point, but it's definitely not like operators aren't putting serious effort into reliable modeling and monitoring to plan for such events (and the conclusion isn't "we'll assume it's out")
I understand the broader point, but it's definitely not like operators aren't putting serious effort into reliable modeling and monitoring to plan for such events (and the conclusion isn't "we'll assume it's out")
July 2, 2025 at 7:54 PM
Definitely, cited reduced flows somewhere else (which the analysis I linked counts)
I understand the broader point, but it's definitely not like operators aren't putting serious effort into reliable modeling and monitoring to plan for such events (and the conclusion isn't "we'll assume it's out")
I understand the broader point, but it's definitely not like operators aren't putting serious effort into reliable modeling and monitoring to plan for such events (and the conclusion isn't "we'll assume it's out")
Future modeling of climate change & extreme weather events' impact on nuclear electricity generation, not net-zero least-cost capacity expansions...
Yes, stronger heat waves are already having an adverse impact on marine ecosystems: however, relationship with reduced nuclear output is exaggerated
Yes, stronger heat waves are already having an adverse impact on marine ecosystems: however, relationship with reduced nuclear output is exaggerated
July 2, 2025 at 5:54 PM
Future modeling of climate change & extreme weather events' impact on nuclear electricity generation, not net-zero least-cost capacity expansions...
Yes, stronger heat waves are already having an adverse impact on marine ecosystems: however, relationship with reduced nuclear output is exaggerated
Yes, stronger heat waves are already having an adverse impact on marine ecosystems: however, relationship with reduced nuclear output is exaggerated
Moving the goalposts a little bit? I'd be glad to also talk about the competitiveness of the proposed EPR2 program with respect to alternative pathways in the French grid, but the discussion was about the relationship between nuclear power plants' reduction in output because of increasing heat waves
July 2, 2025 at 4:29 PM
Moving the goalposts a little bit? I'd be glad to also talk about the competitiveness of the proposed EPR2 program with respect to alternative pathways in the French grid, but the discussion was about the relationship between nuclear power plants' reduction in output because of increasing heat waves
Yes indeed (and other reasons)
While legacy plants may require refurbishments to be able to sustainably manage higher temperatures or reduced flows, new reactors can incorporate such features in the design from the get-go
Moreover, analysis of the issue reveals a much smaller hurdle than promulgated
While legacy plants may require refurbishments to be able to sustainably manage higher temperatures or reduced flows, new reactors can incorporate such features in the design from the get-go
Moreover, analysis of the issue reveals a much smaller hurdle than promulgated
Operational data and future modelling suggest the opposite: most thermal plants will encounter more common water availability restrictions, but no seasonal unviability
PS: negligent effect wrt annual gen (0.15%), marginal for peak load (5%)
www.iaea.org/sites/defaul...
cdn.catf.us/wp-content/u...
PS: negligent effect wrt annual gen (0.15%), marginal for peak load (5%)
www.iaea.org/sites/defaul...
cdn.catf.us/wp-content/u...
July 2, 2025 at 3:51 PM
Yes indeed (and other reasons)
While legacy plants may require refurbishments to be able to sustainably manage higher temperatures or reduced flows, new reactors can incorporate such features in the design from the get-go
Moreover, analysis of the issue reveals a much smaller hurdle than promulgated
While legacy plants may require refurbishments to be able to sustainably manage higher temperatures or reduced flows, new reactors can incorporate such features in the design from the get-go
Moreover, analysis of the issue reveals a much smaller hurdle than promulgated
- indeed a rising issue, but the effect's extent is often exaggerated (and dwarfed by other factors)
- overall, decreased energy loss severity in the face of more extreme events
- legacy plants may require refurbs, but new reactors can incorporate such features in the design
Relevant documents below
- overall, decreased energy loss severity in the face of more extreme events
- legacy plants may require refurbs, but new reactors can incorporate such features in the design
Relevant documents below
Operational data and future modelling suggest the opposite: most thermal plants will encounter more common water availability restrictions, but no seasonal unviability
PS: negligent effect wrt annual gen (0.15%), marginal for peak load (5%)
www.iaea.org/sites/defaul...
cdn.catf.us/wp-content/u...
PS: negligent effect wrt annual gen (0.15%), marginal for peak load (5%)
www.iaea.org/sites/defaul...
cdn.catf.us/wp-content/u...
July 2, 2025 at 3:17 PM
- indeed a rising issue, but the effect's extent is often exaggerated (and dwarfed by other factors)
- overall, decreased energy loss severity in the face of more extreme events
- legacy plants may require refurbs, but new reactors can incorporate such features in the design
Relevant documents below
- overall, decreased energy loss severity in the face of more extreme events
- legacy plants may require refurbs, but new reactors can incorporate such features in the design
Relevant documents below
Even if that argument points to possible solutions (auxiliary systems that make it possible for the power plant to not have to shutdown because of water temperatures or flow rates), I agree it's too dismissive
From my POV, most important aspects are quantification of the issue and future planning
From my POV, most important aspects are quantification of the issue and future planning
Operational data and future modelling suggest the opposite: most thermal plants will encounter more common water availability restrictions, but no seasonal unviability
PS: negligent effect wrt annual gen (0.15%), marginal for peak load (5%)
www.iaea.org/sites/defaul...
cdn.catf.us/wp-content/u...
PS: negligent effect wrt annual gen (0.15%), marginal for peak load (5%)
www.iaea.org/sites/defaul...
cdn.catf.us/wp-content/u...
July 2, 2025 at 3:05 PM
Even if that argument points to possible solutions (auxiliary systems that make it possible for the power plant to not have to shutdown because of water temperatures or flow rates), I agree it's too dismissive
From my POV, most important aspects are quantification of the issue and future planning
From my POV, most important aspects are quantification of the issue and future planning
Operational data and future modelling suggest the opposite: most thermal plants will encounter more common water availability restrictions, but no seasonal unviability
PS: negligent effect wrt annual gen (0.15%), marginal for peak load (5%)
www.iaea.org/sites/defaul...
cdn.catf.us/wp-content/u...
PS: negligent effect wrt annual gen (0.15%), marginal for peak load (5%)
www.iaea.org/sites/defaul...
cdn.catf.us/wp-content/u...
July 2, 2025 at 2:57 PM
Operational data and future modelling suggest the opposite: most thermal plants will encounter more common water availability restrictions, but no seasonal unviability
PS: negligent effect wrt annual gen (0.15%), marginal for peak load (5%)
www.iaea.org/sites/defaul...
cdn.catf.us/wp-content/u...
PS: negligent effect wrt annual gen (0.15%), marginal for peak load (5%)
www.iaea.org/sites/defaul...
cdn.catf.us/wp-content/u...