It is more difficult for nuclear power to compete against natural gas priced at $2.00 compared to $5.50. The fracking revolution created a glut of nat gas in the US. Perhaps some of that glut will be reduced with an increasing export market to Europe. It is also more difficult for nuclear to compete against the $billions$ in federal, state and even local subsidies and tax breaks given to wind, solar and other renewables. To provide those subsidies to only the politically popular renewable energy sources does not result in a level playing field.
Will the nat gas price go back down to $2 if/when the Ukraine situation is resolved? We shall see, but I think Russia will be an international pariah for a while, and the EU lately seems more willing to purchase LNG via ship than have it delivered through pipelines.
There is a reason people diversify their stock portfolios. Having a basket of several different kinds of investment vehicles in multiple industries protects against a large impact if one or two sectors take a sudden hit. The same reasoning should apply to electric utilities. Having nuclear in an energy portfolio protects against a sudden increase in, say, natural gas prices due to international events. But today’s utility executives are often more concerned with the short term performance of their company’s stock price than with planning for the long term.
- Pete