Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Andris Piebalgs: Nuclear and the EU's Energy Policy | 51 comments (51 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)
Leaving money on the table (none / 1)
One of the fundamental axioms in economics is that in an "efficient" transaction there will be no money left on the table. That is, that the sellers will charge as much as they can.

We have already seen this happening with wind power, as the price of building wind farms has risen dramatically over the past few years. I know that Jerome will point out the many causes for this, but the fact is that, eventually, wind will end up only slightly cheaper than other technologies. Why should a firm charge 80% of the going rate for conventionally generated power when it would still be a good deal at 95%?

One can have state controlled, or regulated entities, and prevent this from happening, but the trend has been away from this for decades. If this is going to be reversed it will take more political will then is currently in evidence.

What I'm leading up to is that nuclear will never be a "bargain". Costs all along the supply chain from ore to fuel rods, to disposal, to facilities will all rise, just because they can. So, whatever other reasons there may be for increasing reliance on nuclear cheaper electricity won't be one of them.

Policies not Politics
---- Daily Landscape

by rdf (robert.feinman@gmail.com) on Mon May 19th, 2008 at 08:48:51 AM EST
Re: Leaving money on the table (none / 0)
good, pragmatic point, rdf.

another example of jeavon's paradox.

'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Mon May 19th, 2008 at 10:28:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: Leaving money on the table (none / 1)
What it keeps coming back to is the historic absence of a workable enterprise model for a utility and the perception that the only alternatives are Public = "State" and "Private" = Owned by a "Corporation" for private profit

What is needed is a "Not for Loss" or "Profit for Purpose" enterprise model.

That's where my stuff comes in - a partnership-based model which is:

(a) a market solution which beats state allocation of resources IMHO;

(b) a market solution without profit leaking out to "rentiers" - so it thereby undercuts the "Private" sector and  out-competes them through the "Co-operative Advantage"....

"The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Tue Jun 17th, 2008 at 03:25:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Andris Piebalgs: Nuclear and the EU's Energy Policy | 51 comments (51 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: