IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v38y2010i9p5174-5188.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The costs of the French nuclear scale-up: A case of negative learning by doing

Author

Listed:
  • Grubler, Arnulf

Abstract

The paper reviews the history and the economics of the French PWR program, which is arguably the most successful nuclear-scale up experience in an industrialized country. Key to this success was a unique institutional framework that allowed for centralized decision making, a high degree of standardization, and regulatory stability, epitomized by comparatively short reactor construction times. Drawing on largely unknown public records, the paper reveals for the first time both absolute as well as yearly and specific reactor costs and their evolution over time. Its most significant finding is that even this most successful nuclear scale-up was characterized by a substantial escalation of real-term construction costs. Conversely, operating costs have remained remarkably flat, despite lowered load factors resulting from the need for load modulation in a system where base-load nuclear power plants supply three quarters of electricity. The French nuclear case illustrates the perils of the assumption of robust learning effects resulting in lowered costs over time in the scale-up of large-scale, complex new energy supply technologies. The uncertainties in anticipated learning effects of new technologies might be much larger that often assumed, including also cases of "negative learning" in which specific costs increase rather than decrease with accumulated experience.

Suggested Citation

  • Grubler, Arnulf, 2010. "The costs of the French nuclear scale-up: A case of negative learning by doing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5174-5188, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:9:p:5174-5188
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(10)00352-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. MacKerron, Gordon, 1992. "Nuclear costs : Why do they keep rising?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(7), pages 641-652, July.
    2. Argote, L. & Epple, D., 1990. "Learning Curves In Manufacturing," GSIA Working Papers 89-90-02, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
    3. Dominique Finon & Carine Staropoli, 2001. "Institutional And Technological Co-Evolution In The French Electronuclear Industry," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 179-199.
    4. Jasper, James M., 1992. "Gods, Titans and mortals : Patterns of state involvement in nuclear development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(7), pages 653-659, July.
    5. Koomey, Jonathan & Hultman, Nathan E., 2007. "A reactor-level analysis of busbar costs for US nuclear plants, 1970-2005," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5630-5642, November.
    6. Gritsevskyi, Andrii & Nakicenovi, Nebojsa, 2000. "Modeling uncertainty of induced technological change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(13), pages 907-921, November.
    7. McCabe, Mark J, 1996. "Principals, Agents, and the Learning Curve: The Case of Steam-Electric Power Plant Design and Construction," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(4), pages 357-375, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Martiskainen, Mari & Hook, Andrew & Baker, Lucy, 2020. "Beyond cost and carbon: The multidimensional co-benefits of low carbon transitions in Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    2. Samadi, Sascha, 2018. "The experience curve theory and its application in the field of electricity generation technologies – A literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2346-2364.
    3. Lovering, Jessica R. & Yip, Arthur & Nordhaus, Ted, 2016. "Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 371-382.
    4. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    5. Berglund, Christer & Soderholm, Patrik, 2006. "Modeling technical change in energy system analysis: analyzing the introduction of learning-by-doing in bottom-up energy models," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(12), pages 1344-1356, August.
    6. Farmer, J. Doyne & Lafond, François, 2016. "How predictable is technological progress?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 647-665.
    7. Yeh, Sonia & Rubin, Edward S., 2007. "A centurial history of technological change and learning curves for pulverized coal-fired utility boilers," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1996-2005.
    8. Matsuo, Yuhji & Nei, Hisanori, 2019. "An analysis of the historical trends in nuclear power plant construction costs: The Japanese experience," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 180-198.
    9. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    10. Wilson, Charlie, 2012. "Up-scaling, formative phases, and learning in the historical diffusion of energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 81-94.
    11. McNerney, James & Doyne Farmer, J. & Trancik, Jessika E., 2011. "Historical costs of coal-fired electricity and implications for the future," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3042-3054, June.
    12. Bossink, Bart, 2020. "Learning strategies in sustainable energy demonstration projects: What organizations learn from sustainable energy demonstrations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    13. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Valentine, Scott Victor, 2010. "The socio-political economy of nuclear energy in China and India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 3803-3813.
    14. Karali, Nihan & Park, Won Young & McNeil, Michael, 2017. "Modeling technological change and its impact on energy savings in the U.S. iron and steel sector," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 447-458.
    15. Nemet, Gregory F., 2009. "Interim monitoring of cost dynamics for publicly supported energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 825-835, March.
    16. Pfenninger, Stefan & Keirstead, James, 2015. "Comparing concentrating solar and nuclear power as baseload providers using the example of South Africa," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 303-314.
    17. Lina Escobar Rangel and Francois Leveque, 2015. "Revisiting the Cost Escalation Curse of Nuclear Power: New Lessons from the French Experience," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
    18. Sandrine Mathy & Patrick Criqui & Katharina Knoop & Manfred Fischedick & Sascha Samadi, 2016. "Uncertainty management and the dynamic adjustment of deep decarbonization pathways," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(sup1), pages 47-62, June.
    19. Mort Webster & Karen Fisher-Vanden & David Popp & Nidhi Santen, 2017. "Should We Give Up after Solyndra? Optimal Technology R&D Portfolios under Uncertainty," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(S1), pages 123-151.
    20. Brian C. O'Neill & Paul Crutzen & Arnulf Gr�bler & Minh Ha Duong & Klaus Keller & Charles Kolstad & Jonathan Koomey & Andreas Lange & Michael Obersteiner & Michael Oppenheimer & William Pepper & Warre, 2006. "Learning and climate change," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(5), pages 585-589, September.
      • Brian C. O'Neill & Paul Crutzen & Arnulf Grübler & Minh Ha-Duong & Klaus Keller & Charles Kolstad & Jonathan Koomey & Andreas Lange & Michael Obersteiner & Michael Oppenheimer & William Pepper & Warre, 2006. "Learning and climate change," Post-Print halshs-00134718, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    France Nuclear Reactor costs;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:9:p:5174-5188. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Haili He). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.