This is the power source investors are overlooking in the push to net-zero emissions, Barclays says
The push to limit the damage from climate change has caused a huge pickup in the adoption of solar, wind and other renewable energy. The costs to operate are dropping, and storage costs also are falling. Of a sign of the way things are headed, BP BP, +3.22% — which produced 2.4 million barrels of oil a day last year — on Tuesday announced a $220 million deal to boost its solar-generation capacity in Texas and the Midwest.
The U.K. bank Barclays says investors are overlooking one key source in the push to decarbonization. “We believe that the current view of investors is that almost the entire gap of required carbon free generation output until 2050 will be met by building more renewables capacity. Nuclear energy, even though still a key part of the global generation mix, is not expected to see an increase in installed capacity,” says the bank in a new report released on Wednesday.
This may be a mistake, the bank argues. Nuclear, like other renewable energy, doesn’t generate direct carbon or greenhouse gas emissions. Unlike renewable energy, nuclear output isn’t influenced by weather conditions and seasonality. If renewable energy operates at a load capacity of about 25%, you have to build 3.5 times more capacity to match nuclear plants operating at a load of 90%.
Nuclear waste also is less than the expected volumetric annual waste from retired solar panels, wind turbine blades and lithium ion batteries. And importantly, nuclear power doesn’t need the storage solutions that renewable energy requires. Nuclear’s high capital costs could come down if their plants’ lives were extended or more plants were built, the report adds.
marketwatch.com |
