Cameco Ord Shs T.CCO

Alternate Symbol(s): CCJ

Energy

Cameco Corporation is engaged in providing uranium fuel to generate clean, reliable baseload electricity around the globe. The Company also offers nuclear fuel processing services, refinery services and manufactures fuel assemblies and reactor components. Its segments include uranium, fuel services and Westinghouse. The uranium segment is involved in the exploration for, mining, milling, purchase and sale of uranium concentrate. The fuel services segment is involved in the refining, conversion and fabrication of uranium concentrate and the purchase and sale of conversion services. The Westinghouse segment is engaged in the nuclear services businesses. Its uranium projects include Millennium, Yeelirrie, and Kintyre. The Cree Extension-Millennium project is a Cameco-operated joint venture located in the southeastern portion of Canada's Athabasca Basin. The Yeelirrie deposit is located approximately 650-kilometer (Km) northeast of Perth and about 750 km south of its Kintyre project.

TSX:CCO - Post by User

Cameco Ord Shs > Wind/solar not well suited nor cost effective for baseload

<< Previous

Bullboard Posts

Next >>

Comment by stockfyon Jan 29, 2021 4:05am

175 Views

Post# 32417782

RE:Wind/solar not well suited nor cost effective for baseload

Excellent said.

Clemxb7 wrote: Nuclear’s big advantage is it has the highest Capacity Factor by a mile it's not even close. Capacity factor can be seen as the amount of electricity a generating station could produce if it ran at 100% over a given period of time say 365 days divided by the actual electricity generated over the same time. Nuclear has a Capacity Factor in the mid 90% area. Considering its carbon free power that’s impressive.

When you calculate the cost generating electricity by a renewable you have to take in all the extra generation that has to be built into the system to make the system reliably generate X amount of power. For instance you might hear wind is cheaper to build than nuclear per megawatt. However wind has a capacity Factor somewhere in the mid 30%. Basically wind can only generate at full name plate between 30 and 40% of the time. So when you design a system using wind power you also have to include the cost of building usually a gas turbine that can be brought on and off powering the grid when needed - e.g. those times when the wind is not blowing or not blowing very strongly. So total cost of wind power is much higher once you take into consideration all the extra stuff that has to be built by the utility to accommodate wind generation.

There is a reason China is steadily building 5 new reactors a year. Nuclear is the only baseload carbon-free alternative. BTW a definition of baseload is the amount of electricity required on a 24/7 basis. E.g. During the day a given utility may need a peak of 5 gigawatts right at 5:30 pm when the peak amount of electricity is required – air con, cooking that sort of thing. At 3 am the same utility only needs to provide 3 gigawatts of electricity because there is less activities using power. That’s the baseload. The amount that is always needed.

Nuclear is the king of baseload and its carbon free. As our planet slowly cooks it is very possible Nuclear could have a real renaissance because with newer designs multiple safety factors can be built in to make things really idiot proof.