nuclear-news

How French nuclear output has declined faster in France than Germany

French decline may be caused by having to ‘load follow’ renewables

David Toke, Aug 09, 2024,  https://davidtoke.substack.com/p/how-french-nuclear-output-has-declined
Whatever one thinks of the German decision to phase-out nuclear power, a really strange thing is that the French are coordinating an unintentional phase-out of nuclear energy. At the same time as Germany has been running down its nuclear production. Much attention has focussed on criticising German policy, but much less on criticising what is a continuing failure of French energy policy.

For sure French non-fossil energy production is still much higher than most countries, but this lead is seriously declining. The proportion of non-fossil electricity production is now little higher than a country such as non-nuclear Denmark which has built up its renewables from virtually nothing in recent times. Talk of building half a dozen more French nuclear plant is – just talk.

Plans for new nuclear plant have been bullish for decades- the term ‘nuclear renaissance’ has been doled out for 20 years. However, in practice, little gets built. On the other hand France is failing to develop its renewable energy industry at anything like a good enough speed to make up for the decline in nuclear production. You can see the comparison of nuclear decline in France and Germany in the graph below [on original], which takes its data from the Energy Institute ‘s Statistical Review of World Energy, see HERE

As can be seen in the graph, from 2011 French nuclear production declined by 104 TWh, whilst in Germany it declined by 101 TWh. Yet it has been the decline in German nuclear production (following the decision to phase out nuclear in 2011) that has been much more of a long-term talking point.

Certainly, the dominant message in the press in the UK, spread by politicians from Labour and Conservatives, is that the failure to stop the decline in nuclear production which has also occurred in the UK is because of political failure. But this story ought to be wearing thin, after so many years of so-called nuclear renaissance and its promotion. Might it just have something to do with the failing nature of the technology itself? This seems obvious to independent observers, but it does not detract from our leaders’ desire to throw immense sums after technology that takes almost forever to deliver.

I discuss these issues in my recently published book Energy Revolutions, Profiteering versus Democracy’ (Pluto Press) (see HERE). But a few salient points can be made here to attempt to explain the decline in nuclear power in France. One can hypothesise a couple of reasons why French nuclear production may be declining. One factor may well simply be that the French nuclear industry did a bad job and built a lot of sub-standard power plant.

There is another possibility which may be adding to the problems caused by the first suggested reason. The French nuclear power stations may be accelerating their own demise because of the technical damage caused by the balancing role they are being forced to play in the French power market. Nuclear power plant in France have been forced to ‘load-follow’ ie, often reduce their output, because of variations in solar and wind power that is generated across the continental electricity system. #

The continental electricity interconnectors use AC transmission equipment which means that France cannot just disconnect when there is too much electricity coming into the French system. French power plant have to power down, and since nuclear forms such a dominant part of French generation, the nuclear power power plant has to regularly ramp up and down.

There are relatively few publicly available discussions of the possibilities for reactor damage in such load-following activities. Such discussions as they are, seem to be side-shows to ascertaining whether load following by nuclear reactors is possible, rather than the long-term damage involved. But there are some pointers in the discussions that are available.

One academic thesis commented, on a simulation based on a Swedish reactor, that: ‘The mechanisms for the damages are for example erosion-corrosion, fatigue, vibrations and wear. In the reactor core, there are also limitations for the rate of how quickly the power decrease and increase can be performed and how low the power can be reduced before problems with xenon poisoning and PCI occur……………….An increased usage of the pumps and valves was shown, which will give an added risk of wear and tear’ (Bjurenfolk, 220, 9 see HERE) . A study published by the Nuclear Energy Agency for the OECD commented: ‘Load cycling leads to variation in the coolant temperature, and thus in the temperatures of different components (see Figure 3.3 and Figure 3.4). These periodic temperature variations lead to cyclic changes in the mechanical load in some parts of the equipment, and could induce localised structural damage (fatigue) of these elements if the temperature gradients are large.’ OECD/NEA 2011, 41, see HERE

Of course in the UK no such problems of damage due to load-following will ever occur for the simple reason that in the UK nuclear power has a privileged position. Despite increasing international interconnection, the interconnection is through DC transmission systems which offer much greater control over imports. Nuclear power plants are allowed to generate as much as they can, and it is renewable energy that has to power down in cases where there are grid constraints or an excess of supply compared to demand.

In the case of Hinkley C, when it eventually comes online, the contracts given to EDF encourage it to carry on generating, not load follow. In the UK it is windfarms that bear political blame for compensation paid to them for lost production when they have to switch off (very often to protect nuclear production). This has been documented by 100percentrenewableuk in the case of Scotland, see HERE.

However, turning back to France, the French Government’s recent press releases on building future nuclear power obscure the fact that it has taken around two decades to build one plant. Meanwhile, the amount of solar and wind power production added in France since 2011 is rather less than the decline in nuclear production. To cap it all EDF has called for subsidies for solar pv to be reviewed (see HERE).

Yes, solar pv may be inconvenient for nuclear power, but it does seem that unless France develops renewables, including solar pv, much more quickly than has been done since 2011, the French electricity system will (at recent rates of nuclear decline) gradually collapse.

Certainly, the dominant message in the press in the UK, spread by politicians from Labour and Conservatives, is that the failure to stop the decline in nuclear production which has also occurred in the UK is because of political failure. But this story ought to be wearing thin, after so many years of so-called nuclear renaissance and its promotion. Might it just have something to do with the failing nature of the technology itself? This seems obvious to independent observers, but it does not detract from our leaders’ desire to throw immense sums after technology that takes almost forever to deliver.

I discuss these issues in my recently published book Energy Revolutions, Profiteering versus Democracy’ (Pluto Press) (see HERE). But a few salient points can be made here to attempt to explain the decline in nuclear power in France. One can hypothesise a couple of reasons why French nuclear production may be declining. One factor may well simply be that the French nuclear industry did a bad job and built a lot of sub-standard power plant.

There is another possibility which may be adding to the problems caused by the first suggested reason. The French nuclear power stations may be accelerating their own demise because of the technical damage caused by the balancing role they are being forced to play in the French power market. Nuclear power plant in France have been forced to ‘load-follow’ ie, often reduce their output, because of variations in solar and wind power that is generated across the continental electricity system. #

The continental electricity interconnectors use AC transmission equipment which means that France cannot just disconnect when there is too much electricity coming into the French system. French power plant have to power down, and since nuclear forms such a dominant part of French generation, the nuclear power power plant has to regularly ramp up and down.

There are relatively few publicly available discussions of the possibilities for reactor damage in such load-following activities. Such discussions as they are, seem to be side-shows to ascertaining whether load following by nuclear reactors is possible, rather than the long-term damage involved. But there are some pointers in the discussions that are available.

One academic thesis commented, on a simulation based on a Swedish reactor, that: ‘The mechanisms for the damages are for example erosion-corrosion, fatigue, vibrations and wear. In the reactor core, there are also limitations for the rate of how quickly the power decrease and increase can be performed and how low the power can be reduced before problems with xenon poisoning and PCI occur……………….An increased usage of the pumps and valves was shown, which will give an added risk of wear and tear’ (Bjurenfolk, 220, 9 see HERE) . A study published by the Nuclear Energy Agency for the OECD commented: ‘Load cycling leads to variation in the coolant temperature, and thus in the temperatures of different components (see Figure 3.3 and Figure 3.4). These periodic temperature variations lead to cyclic changes in the mechanical load in some parts of the equipment, and could induce localised structural damage (fatigue) of these elements if the temperature gradients are large.’ OECD/NEA 2011, 41, see HERE

Of course in the UK no such problems of damage due to load-following will ever occur for the simple reason that in the UK nuclear power has a privileged position. Despite increasing international interconnection, the interconnection is through DC transmission systems which offer much greater control over imports. Nuclear power plants are allowed to generate as much as they can, and it is renewable energy that has to power down in cases where there are grid constraints or an excess of supply compared to demand

As can be seen in the graph, from 2011 French nuclear production declined by 104 TWh, whilst in Germany it declined by 101 TWh. Yet it has been the decline in German nuclear production (following the decision to phase out nuclear in 2011) that has been much more of a long-term talking point.

Certainly, the dominant message in the press in the UK, spread by politicians from Labour and Conservatives, is that the failure to stop the decline in nuclear production which has also occurred in the UK is because of political failure. But this story ought to be wearing thin, after so many years of so-called nuclear renaissance and its promotion. Might it just have something to do with the failing nature of the technology itself? This seems obvious to independent observers, but it does not detract from our leaders’ desire to throw immense sums after technology that takes almost forever to deliver.

I discuss these issues in my recently published book Energy Revolutions, Profiteering versus Democracy’ (Pluto Press) (see HERE). But a few salient points can be made here to attempt to explain the decline in nuclear power in France. One can hypothesise a couple of reasons why French nuclear production may be declining. One factor may well simply be that the French nuclear industry did a bad job and built a lot of sub-standard power plant.

There is another possibility which may be adding to the problems caused by the first suggested reason. The French nuclear power stations may be accelerating their own demise because of the technical damage caused by the balancing role they are being forced to play in the French power market. Nuclear power plant in France have been forced to ‘load-follow’ ie, often reduce their output, because of variations in solar and wind power that is generated across the continental electricity system. #

The continental electricity interconnectors use AC transmission equipment which means that France cannot just disconnect when there is too much electricity coming into the French system. French power plant have to power down, and since nuclear forms such a dominant part of French generation, the nuclear power power plant has to regularly ramp up and down.

There are relatively few publicly available discussions of the possibilities for reactor damage in such load-following activities. Such discussions as they are, seem to be side-shows to ascertaining whether load following by nuclear reactors is possible, rather than the long-term damage involved. But there are some pointers in the discussions that are available.

One academic thesis commented, on a simulation based on a Swedish reactor, that: ‘The mechanisms for the damages are for example erosion-corrosion, fatigue, vibrations and wear. In the reactor core, there are also limitations for the rate of how quickly the power decrease and increase can be performed and how low the power can be reduced before problems with xenon poisoning and PCI occur……………….An increased usage of the pumps and valves was shown, which will give an added risk of wear and tear’ (Bjurenfolk, 220, 9 see HERE) . A study published by the Nuclear Energy Agency for the OECD commented: ‘Load cycling leads to variation in the coolant temperature, and thus in the temperatures of different components (see Figure 3.3 and Figure 3.4). These periodic temperature variations lead to cyclic changes in the mechanical load in some parts of the equipment, and could induce localised structural damage (fatigue) of these elements if the temperature gradients are large.’ OECD/NEA 2011, 41, see HERE

Of course in the UK no such problems of damage due to load-following will ever occur for the simple reason that in the UK nuclear power has a privileged position. Despite increasing international interconnection, the interconnection is through DC transmission systems which offer much greater control over imports. Nuclear power plants are allowed to generate as much as they can, and it is renewable energy that has to power down in cases where there are grid constraints or an excess of supply compared to demand.

In the case of Hinkley C, when it eventually comes online, the contracts given to EDF encourage it to carry on generating, not load follow. In the UK it is windfarms that bear political blame for compensation paid to them for lost production when they have to switch off (very often to protect nuclear production). This has been documented by 100percentrenewableuk in the case of Scotland, see HERE.

However, turning back to France, the French Government’s recent press releases on building future nuclear power obscure the fact that it has taken around two decades to build one plant. Meanwhile, the amount of solar and wind power production added in France since 2011 is rather less than the decline in nuclear production. To cap it all EDF has called for subsidies for solar pv to be reviewed (see HERE).

Yes, solar pv may be inconvenient for nuclear power, but it does seem that unless France develops renewables, including solar pv, much more quickly than has been done since 2011, the French electricity system will (at recent rates of nuclear decline) gradually collapse.

August 11, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | ENERGY, France | Leave a comment