Here is a price comparison table from The European Energy Portal.
We can do a little analysis of relative electricity prices in Europe.
Highest prices are in Denmark closely followed by Germany. France is the lowest in Western Europe and Bulgaria is the lowest overall.
- The Danish pay well over twice the price for their electricity compared to the French.
- The Germans pay 190% more for electricity than the French, i.e. nearly double.
- The Italians pay 49% more for their electricity than the French
- The Spanish pay 43% more for their electricity than the French. Half as much again.
- The British pay 12% more than the French.
It is interesting to correlate these price differences to installed generation capacity.
- The Danes are the world leaders per head of population in installed wind power. They also have, by far the most expensive electricity in Europe.
- Germany has the largest European installation of wind power. It is number two is this highest priced electricity in Europe
- Spain is close on Germany's heels for installed capacity. Their prices though are a little more reasonable, they are tenth in the price league table.
- Italy comes a poor third on total installed wind capacity but like the Spanish, they cough up half as much again as the French.
What does this tell us?
Well, I think that the overriding fact is that French Nuclear power (80% of French Electricity generation is nuclear) provides by far, the cheapest electricity in Europe.
Interestingly, the French have the fourth largest number of wind turbines in Europe but like Italy (No 3) and the UK (No 5) this number is about one quarter of that in Germany and Spain.
Compared to Denmark, France (like Italy and the UK) has less than one tenth of the installed number of turbines per head of population.
It would militate that when installed wind power capacity gets above a certain percentage, the price to the consumer sky-rockets. It also shows that wind power is the inflationary driver behind electricity price hikes all across Europe. Generally the more turbines per head of population, the higher your electricity bills are. French prices are driven low by nuclear. If they dispensed with their windmills then their prices would probably be even less.
But the above table contains another really disgraceful truth.
Compare the prices for all of the above nations for a low level user (left column) and a high level user (right column).
You will find that in most countries, including Denmark, Germany, Spain, France and the UK, the high level user gets a discount. In Western Europe, only Italy and the Netherlands charge more for profligate useage.
Surely, if we are trying to cut down on energy useage, we should stop having the smaller users subsidising the higher users.
In other words, why do we have pensioners and the thrifty, subsiding the extravagance of the well-off or careless?
Is that not basic common sense that we should reward energy thift, no punish it?
17 comments:
Ok, I had a bash at the comparison you suggest, and there's the suggestion a trend, although I'd question why price is some places, e.g Belgium and the UK, are so high when the per capita wind is so low. Similarly Malta has no wind turbines at all but it doesn't have a low residential electricity cost.
My question is why, if wind power is the inflationary driver behind electricity price hikes, does the corrollation vanish when you apply industrial prices instead of residential? (available through the same portal)
Rozza,
Looking at the figures for industrial pricing, the trend does not vanish although I admit it is slightly shallower
using the example countries..
Denmark vs France industrial price is 143% - 153%
Germany vs France industrial price is 178% - 174%
But these are still huge differences.
The UK industrial compared... 150% - 145% which I freely admit is terrible and I think simply show the lack of commitment we have to industry in the UK. (bear in mind domestic difference is 112%)
France is still the cheapest in Western Europe, and by a fair margin for either market.
Malta is interesting. Possibly Malta is one of those places that would benefit from wind generation. An isolated island that (probably) relies on high cost diesel generation (correct me if I am wrong) is exactly the type of place that wind power can make a difference.
But really, the current highly expensive (Cost + ROC = 2 x Cost ++) wind generation here (and in Europe) is a major cost driver.
It is also the poor who pay the lions share, but more on that in another post
Many parts of Italy have "power rationing" and plans are under way to extend this...
One of the consequences of "Smart Metering" is that it will allow suppliers to reach into homes and disconnect supply on both an appliance based level and simply at the meter. This is not discussed much in relation to smart metering, it all about "energy saving".
I deleted a comment here (which I thought was actually relevant) - unfortunately the link was to an affiliate marketing electric price comparison site. I don't mind commercial sites or ANY relevant comment but this is not an advertising board.
Anyway.. his comment..
Wow, it seems that Bulgaria is almost giving away their energy. It would be interesting to figure out why this is. I imagine that it's not wind power that is causing the increased price differences, but overall cost of living and taxes that cause these differences.
My reply will be below
Bulgaria, like France is a net exporter of electricity. Their approximate generation mix (2005) was 20% nuclear (rising soon to 35%) thermal 55% (decreasing) and Hydro 25%. Their wind generation (2009) both built and building amounted to 100MW out of a generation capacity of 11,000MW. That is less than 1%.
Like France Bulgaria makes a net profit out of exporting electricity, whereas Denmark doesn't.
Bulgaria, compared to Western Europe is a poor country. Of course this has an effect on pricing. That is why I was careful to compare like with like: Germany France Denmark UK.
I also mentioned Spain which is slightly down the league table. If you want to see the real damage done by wind look at Spain. The country has been literally bankrupted by wind power. (no - that is not an exaggeration. Other factors have also caused their financial crisis, but spending on wind power is a primary cause)
I understand the Spanish govt. are planning to renege on their extortionate feed in tariffs.
Good for them.
Thanks for the article, I understand the different points of view much better now
A distorted view in my opinion.
Comparing energy production prices is one thing but whole lifecycle is quite another.
When accounting for build, waste disposal and decommissioning, nuclear comes out as the most expensive form of energy available, far more expensive than wind.
Then if you factor in insurance costs which is effectively picked up by the tax payer as no commercial insurance company will touch it, then the theoretical costs go through the roof!
The truth is, in these days of austerity, we simply cannot afford nuclear power.
The facts are the facts.
French nuclear power (which is what almost all French electrical power is from) is the cheapest in Western Europe.
Look at the table! No amount of denial will make that fact go away.
If you reckon that nuclear is the most expensive show me how. Show me the figures from a non biased and factual body. Prove it to me.
Please! I would love to see them.
No amount of wishful thinking, scare-mongering or denial will make this simple fact go away.
French Nuclear Power is the cheapest in Europe.
Regards
Billo
The question for me is, who pays for the decommissioning of these nuclear power stations. I have read that they are astronomically expensive to decommission, and the tax payer foots the bill, not the power companies.
So the price is not paid at the time of consumption, but later.
Regards
Natty
Hi Natty,
I appreciate your concern about decommissioning but really, even taking into account decommissioning costs the price of nuclear generated power is still the lowest(or next lowest after CCGT Gas).
The French are not going to go bankrupt when they have to decommission old nuclear plant and nor will we.
The anti-nuclear lobby love throwing around figures which are usually a cumulative total over many years and then they big them up a bit more.
While the figures may sound huge they are, bearing in mind the actual amount of power generated and the time scale very manageable.
What you need are some cold hard facts.
Can I refer you to another of my posts which in turn refers to report by the Royal Society of Engineers (the elite engineering group in the UK).
I pull out what I think are the critical issues but their report gives a very detailed (though very dry) analysis of the true costs of electrical generation from all sources. Notice though, that if anything they err on the side of caution with nuclear by ignoring the decommissioning costs for everything other than nuclear.
A direct link to the RSE document is here:
http://www.raeng.org.uk/news/publications/list/reports/Cost_Generation_Commentary.pdf
My post is here:
http://billothewisp.blogspot.com/2011/05/cost-of-generating-electricity.html
France has the >>appearance<< of cheap electricity, but the price paid per kWh is not the true price paid by French consumers because their nationalised system is paid for via their taxes.
Try reading the following to understand how "cheap" France's electricity is: http://www.psr.org/nuclear-bailout/resources/nuclear-power-in-france.pdf
Hi Ray,
I will reply asap, but I am up to my eyes at the moment (hopefully I'll reply later today/tomorrow)
Regards
Bill
Ray,
Thank you for the reference. I always appreciate it when a commenter backs up their views with referenced document(s).
I always try and read what has been presented, which I have done with this one, although obviously due to timescales, I have not dwelt on every word.
Sadly I am distinctly underwhelmed by document (I'll explain why in a minute), but even so, I still could find no reference within it that would indicate that the figures given in this post (taken from the European Energy portal) are wrong. In fact on page 39 in the "Conclusions" for this paper when referring to France, the author states:
[quote]
Electricity prices remain relatively low by EU standards.
[unquote]
The point the author tries to assert in this paper is that French Energy prices (which electricity is only a part) are high.
This may well be true, but you can hardly blame nuclear electricity generation ( or wind for that matter) for the fact that cars and lorries run on oil. Although the author does his best.
The author describes some rather politically bizarre methods where several 100 million euros from the energy budget get diverted to other uses, but really he singularly fails to pick any real holes in the successful French nuclear policy.
Finally, you really must take into account that the report is commissioned by the Green Party and is produced by an individual who has a very clear and long
held anti-nuclear agenda.
While neither of these facts should negate the document, they demand a level of caution when analysing it.
Of course you are free to only partially read the evidence, but this will leave you with flawed beliefs on this subject.
I would just say you should make note of what is happening in reality - long-term global decline in nuclear energy, exponential growth in renewable energy. Even France are now investing heavily in renewables.
These things are true for a number of reasons, and you should make effort to research them to understand why your beliefs do not match reality.
P.S. You seem to have continued to confuse 'cheap electricity' paid by the French consumer with total cost to the French taxpayer. I cannot explain it any more simply: what the French pay per kWh at their meter is not a true reflection of the total cost for its production.
Well Ray,
You gave me a link to a highly biased document that is to supposedly prove the French are paying some massive hidden tax somewhere.
But in this bad tempered document I can find no reference to any figures that tell what this supposed tax is, or what its houshold value is supposed to be.
My figures (like the ones on this post) are verifyable, clear and presented up front.
If in my so called "partial reading" I've missed some relevent and verifyable data in this Green Party propaganda peice of yours, please point me at where it is and I will check it out.
It is no good simply chanting your anti-nuclear mantra about hidden taxes without backing it up with some verifyable figures.
Which currently look like they simply don't exist.
Whether you like it or not, the Germans and the Danes pay about 100% more for their electricity than the French. Even if you can produce some mythical hidden tax are you seriously suggesting it secretly doubles the average French family electrical energy bill ?
However much you indulge in denialism and wishful thinking the simple truths as displayed on the European Energy Portal remain.
French Nuclear Power provides the cheapest electricity in Western Europe, whereas Danish and German electrical generation, with their
swarm of wind turbines provide the most expensive.
De Facto.
regards
Billo
How can you know something is "highly biased" if you refuse to read it? This suggests you are not open to knowledge that contradicts what you >>want<< to be true. I see this often with people who believe in nuclear power - it is more ideology than anything else.
Why do you now say "my so called "partial reading""? You told me that "due to timescales, I have not dwelt on every word." Put simply: you did not read it all.
You continue to claim French electricity is the cheapest in Europe by the simplistic 'analysis' of looking only at cost per kWh paid by consumers. But you now know that the French electricity system is nationalised and therefore many costs are paid for by taxpayers. For example the reactor at Flamanville is many years behind schedule and many billions of Euros over budget - but this does not appear on French electricity bills. It is paid for out of the French taxpayer's bank account. You are simply denying the undeniable.
It seems you do not wish to do any research or reading that contradicts what you want to be true. This is common for people who >>believe<< in nuclear power.
Nuclear power has been delcining globally for many years now. Renewable energy is growing at exponential rates all over the world. These are facts which you can find and read for yourself. It is then up to you if you choose to research further to understand why these things are happening.
Ray,
You contradict yourself in the first two paragraphs. First I supposedly didn't read the thing, then you berate me for only partialy reading it!
Out of courtesy, I did read your document, but as I said, I did not dwell on every word. Basically most of the document has little or nothing to do with the cost of electricity to the French consumer, let alone giving any hard data relating to
some underhand doubling of the average French electricity bill.
Just because the words "French" and "Nuclear" appear in it, and it is rabidly anti nuclear, does not mean this document has any relevence to the post in hand.
But even so, I did plow my way through it. After all I did read it deeply enough to pick out (some grudgingly admitted) statements that actually support my opinion! (see comment above)
The offer is still there. If I have missed some vital table, graph or verifiable evidence in this document that show how the French are paying a mysterious 100% tax to pay for nuclear electricity please give me the page reference, and I will read it and comment accordingly. I'm still waiting. May I suggest you read it (again) yourself?
By the way, after berating me for reading/not reading/skimming your document, have you even looked at any of the four I recommended? I hasten to add three of these are unquestionably apolitical while the fourth from the GWPF is at least written by a respected and world class academic. No offence to the no-name anti-nuclear evangelist author of your document, but really, he is hardly in the same class is he?
Just leaving France and secret taxes to one side for the moment.
What about the rest of Europe?
Denmark, followed by Germany have the most expensive electricity in Europe (it says so in the table).
Now, why is that then?
What separates out these countries from others, even the UK for example.
The truth is that coal, oil and gas (and nuclear) are much cheaper than wind. If we really want to decarbonise electricity generation we must go with a solution that works, with a forty year track record, not a pitiful intermittent, expensive and unreliable fashion statement.
As the post says, wind power is the primary driver forcing up electricity prices all over Europe, especially in countries with a high adoption rate.
Decarbonising electrical generation is a good idea but it has to be affordable and ractical.
In other words it must work.
Take away the subsidies and wind is doomed to failure. Nuclear is the only viable option.
If you want to see what your so-called long term decline in nuclear really is, see my post "Is Nuclear in decline or not?"
As for Flamaville and its Finnish twin they are prototypes Ray. The first of type. Of course there are hold ups.
That's engineering!
Post a Comment