Oh, really? What's your solution to producing non-polluting power when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow?

> Electricity usage is not actually constant and nuclear power doesn't do load following unless you double the cost again

Can you explain how you've come to this conclusion?

We recently turned up a new nuclear power plant in Finland and they did nothing but turn up and down the generation levels when doing tests. Looking at the graphs, I can see output has varied between 3,3 and 4,3 GW this week.

The local wikipedia article on nuclear power states that power output can be regulated 5%/min, which is faster than almost all other generation methods.

> Theres a reason only France tried that - strongly related to the reason why Areva went spectacularly bankrupt.

Are you saying that Areva went over budget because they build us a load following nuclear plant?

> Theres no reality in which it makes any economic sense except #1 providing military support or #2 a pretend reality where all available storage options dont work.

Pray do tell what those available storage options are. Give us the real skinny then, none of that FUDD.