> Nuclear fuel, even with all the processing costs included, only comes to about US$1,663 per kilogram (2.2 lb). Because nuclear fuel has such an incredible energy density, that's about 0.46 ¢/kWh – and the fuel costs keep dropping as the technology becomes more efficient.
That’s…not actually cheap? As a consumer, I pay less than half that per kWh delivered at peak hours.
Even the cheapest way to produce electricity nowadays (PV) isn't below 1 cent/kWh (production, not end-user costs) yet and your quote refers to only the costs of the fuel itself.
If your wind/solar energy pricing goes negative, you're not using enough storage. Build more batteries, suck up that excess energy, and maximize feeding back to the grid when on-demand prices are high.
Is already happening for over a year. PV sales is down by 90%, last year there was a sellout of PV companies on brookz.nl and this year they are going mostly bankrupt.
Consumers are now having a PV problem because they have to pay for their panels (I was asked to pay 800 euro per year). So, there is the incentive for many consumers willing to purchase a battery.
An alternative solution is the position of the panels. It is useless to have panels facing south, and don't use the roof, use the facade to improve the off season performance.
The situation is you will need to pay a premium to the utility company once you are feeding electricity into the grid. The mandatory digital meter will register both usage and production flow separately.
That’s…not actually cheap? As a consumer, I pay less than half that per kWh delivered at peak hours.