There are a lot of factors. But for most of the world, yes, renewables + storage is cheaper than any other option already:
Unsubsidized Solar Remains Most Cost-Efficient Energy Option in US
With the added costs of energy storage, the LCOE for wind rises to $US45-$133/MWh, which is still much cheaper than coal ($69-$168/MWh) and competitive with combined cycle gas ($45-$108/MWh).
Utility-scale solar, meanwhile, is valued at more than half the cost of coal, at an LCOE of between $29-$92/MWh, average $61/MWh. Large-scale solar with storage ranges in LCOE from between $60/MWh and $210/MWh.
The cost of nuclear power, meanwhile, has doubled since hitting a low of $US95/MWh in 2011, to an average of $US182/MWh, or ranging between $US142/MWh and $US222/MWh, in 2024.
In Sweden, where nuclear power generated 41% of the annual electricity supply in 2014, the official goal is 100% renewable electricity production by 2040. Therefore, we investigate the cost of a future low-carbon electricity system without nuclear power for Sweden. …
Our results show that there are no, or only minor, cost benefits to reinvest in nuclear power plants in Sweden once the old ones are decommissioned.
The race is over in most the world now, even if you could build a nuclear plant in a day. But given how long nuclear takes to build (still averaging over 6 years, many much longer). It’ll be surprising if any nuclear plant started now would be viable anywhere by the time it’s up and running.
I’m a solar energy nerd myself and watching the prices of LiFePO4 batteries over the past 2 years has been astonishing, I wonder what will happen with sodium batteries in the upcoming years. I wasn’t aware of the overall economic maturity of solar+storage as of today, and it’s impressive.
My only argument is: the prices for nuclear in all sources you’ve sent, from what I’ve seen, are in the west. US, Sweden, Denmark… China is planning to build 150GW of nuclear over the next 5 years, and more afterwards. What would be the environmental impact and the cost of Chinese new-gen nuclear when compared with Chinese PV+wind+storage? The data for China is hard to find in English unfortunately.
Given that China is probably always 5+ years ahead of us both in nuclear and renewable generation tech, it’s hard to know…
China has a lot of different terrains, it may be more suitable locations that do make economic sense, it may be to just utilise existing industrial chains to maximise the speed with which they can ramp up energy production, maybe the new-gen nuclear is somehow that much magically better, or it may just be outdated decision making.
Without knowing highly technical chinese, who knows. But to be honest, there’s no reason to think the picture is that drastically different. Probably a complicated combination of all the factors and more.
I agree the onset of stuff like cheap cheap sodium batteries could be further game changers.
There are a lot of factors. But for most of the world, yes, renewables + storage is cheaper than any other option already:
https://reneweconomy.com.au/wind-and-solar-power-half-the-cost-of-coal-and-gas-one-third-the-cost-of-nuclear-says-lazard/
https://energyfactcheck.com.au/2025/01/18/are-renewables-more-expensive-than-coal-gas-and-nuclear/
https://www.volts.wtf/p/solarstorage-is-so-much-farther-along
Even in cold, darker places like Sweden:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261924010882
https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.03679
The cost of battery storage projects has declined over 90% since 2010. Solar farms became over 20% cheaper just this year.. Conservative estimates put a further 20-50% drop in prices for various renewables + energy storage solutions over the next 10 years..
The race is over in most the world now, even if you could build a nuclear plant in a day. But given how long nuclear takes to build (still averaging over 6 years, many much longer). It’ll be surprising if any nuclear plant started now would be viable anywhere by the time it’s up and running.
Thanks a lot for providing the sources.
I’m a solar energy nerd myself and watching the prices of LiFePO4 batteries over the past 2 years has been astonishing, I wonder what will happen with sodium batteries in the upcoming years. I wasn’t aware of the overall economic maturity of solar+storage as of today, and it’s impressive.
My only argument is: the prices for nuclear in all sources you’ve sent, from what I’ve seen, are in the west. US, Sweden, Denmark… China is planning to build 150GW of nuclear over the next 5 years, and more afterwards. What would be the environmental impact and the cost of Chinese new-gen nuclear when compared with Chinese PV+wind+storage? The data for China is hard to find in English unfortunately.
Given that China is probably always 5+ years ahead of us both in nuclear and renewable generation tech, it’s hard to know…
China has a lot of different terrains, it may be more suitable locations that do make economic sense, it may be to just utilise existing industrial chains to maximise the speed with which they can ramp up energy production, maybe the new-gen nuclear is somehow that much magically better, or it may just be outdated decision making.
Without knowing highly technical chinese, who knows. But to be honest, there’s no reason to think the picture is that drastically different. Probably a complicated combination of all the factors and more.
I agree the onset of stuff like cheap cheap sodium batteries could be further game changers.