Thinking that nuclear fission stations would lead to super cheap power is somewhat naive. Nuclear power stations are incredibly expensive to build. There is the cost of fuel, decomissioning and ongoing costs for waste disposal - note that most of this is not spent fuel rods, but things like PPE which can only be used for a certain amount of time.
Wind and solar have at times pushed wholesale prices negative in Germany in the past - that doesn't necessarily translate to a cost for users (ie homeowners). I'm not super familiar withWe really need much better local storage so that people can soak up excess power, or fabled smart appliances that communicate properly to use electricty at an appropriate time.
One issue is if you run a power plant which is difficult to shut off quickly, or the time to start up is also prohibitive. You might choose to take the hit and pay for the grid to take your power, rather than shutdown and lose out when demand increases in the future. If I understand correctly, this cost is sometimes passed to consumers (e.g. if your supplier owns the plant). So consumers actually lose when prices go negative - indeed if you have your own generators, in theory you should also be paying to supply the grid when demand is negative if you don't disconnect your feed. What should happen in an ideal world is you'd store/use it locally (say charge your car up).
> Wind and solar have at times pushed wholesale prices negative in Germany in the past
Germany has extremely high electricity prices for the consumer. It doesn't matter if it's occasionally negative if the average is extremely costly, because you need electricity all the time.
Wind and solar have at times pushed wholesale prices negative in Germany in the past - that doesn't necessarily translate to a cost for users (ie homeowners). I'm not super familiar withWe really need much better local storage so that people can soak up excess power, or fabled smart appliances that communicate properly to use electricty at an appropriate time.
One issue is if you run a power plant which is difficult to shut off quickly, or the time to start up is also prohibitive. You might choose to take the hit and pay for the grid to take your power, rather than shutdown and lose out when demand increases in the future. If I understand correctly, this cost is sometimes passed to consumers (e.g. if your supplier owns the plant). So consumers actually lose when prices go negative - indeed if you have your own generators, in theory you should also be paying to supply the grid when demand is negative if you don't disconnect your feed. What should happen in an ideal world is you'd store/use it locally (say charge your car up).
See https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/windy-february-drove-re...
https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/why-power-prices-...
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266679242...