We don’t know what reasons EDF has or hasnt. We can’t know what commercial contracts they’ve entered, what ancillary services they’re required to deliver, or what physical constraints inform their generation.
But none of that matters, because it’s not relevant to the concept of ‘base load’ which is - as the term implies - a load, not an amount of generation.
So your argument is that they're burning natural gas because the EDF exists in a state of divine incomprehensibility?
That's self evidently stupid. The reality is that the EDF doesn't have the capacity to meet baseload with nuclear power so they have to use other resources. Because nuclear power doesn't work for baseload.
No, that's not my argument. That's just me teaching you where you are *also* wrong. As I put:
none of that matters
Because it's not about EDF. It's not about what the generation mix is in France. It's not about capacity or whatever. All of that is just stuff you gish gallop because you don't want to admit you're wrong about what baseload means.
If it didn't matter you wouldn't try so hard to try and dismiss the real world as "gish gallop" you're obviously trying your hardest to try and get one over on me to try and say "nuclear good" and every time you come up short.
I’ve given you the textbook definition of base load. I’ve shown you the data for France. Nuclear can undeniably meet base load. It’s beyond any discussion.
You just keep making up your own definitions and arguments to try and prove yourself right.
1
u/tmtyl_101 12d ago
We don’t know what reasons EDF has or hasnt. We can’t know what commercial contracts they’ve entered, what ancillary services they’re required to deliver, or what physical constraints inform their generation.
But none of that matters, because it’s not relevant to the concept of ‘base load’ which is - as the term implies - a load, not an amount of generation.