Reply #47: That isn't how electrical wholesale purchase and distribution works in this country.

[Statistical]

TVA is both a power producer and a utility.

TVA the utility is obligated to buy power from lowest power providers. All power providers set prices on SouthEast wholesale energy interchange and based on demand the automatic system allocates power starts and stops. TVA the power producer sells power into that exchange. The only way that power will be bought is if it is competitive. If it isn't compeitive the power won't be bought and other providers will be used. THAT IS HOW POWER DISTRIBUTION HAS WORKED IN THIS COUNTRY FOR 20+ YEARS.

Of course power costs are paid by consumers but low carbon power is more expensive than other forms of power. Wind "shifts" higher cost of low carbon power onto the consumer compared to existing coal plants.

The reality is other than your bogus studies most people accept nuclear has a low price per kWh. Certainly low compared to other forms of low carbon power. The only thing cheaper is hydro.

DOE, OECD, IPCC all recognize that. If nuclear was as expensive as you claim it was nobody would buy it.

If you want to dispute that, feel free to show me proof of a turnkey contract where Bechtel has agreed to deliver a completed plant for $2.5 billion by 2013; because that is the only way the risk to the ratepayers could possibly be mitigated.

Nuclear power doesn't need a capital cost of $2.5 billion. :rofl: Given the higher capacity factor compared to wind 0.92 vs 0.26 1 GW of nuclear power is roughly equal to 4 GW of wind power.

$2.5 billion reactor / 1150MW = $2173 per KW overnight.
That would be comparable to wind turbine at $614 per KW overnight. ($2173 * 0.26 / 0.92)

So I will show you a $2.5 billion reactor when you should be a 2.5MW turbine for $1.5 million. :rofl: