IESET.
Hypotheses·energy·nuclear_phaseout_grid_reliability_cost_tradeoff

Countries that legislated and executed nuclear phase-outs (Germany 2011-2023, Belgium 2003 law with 2025-2035 phase-out, Switzerland 2017 vote) experienced over 2010-2024 (a) higher industrial electricity prices, (b) higher wholesale electricity price volatility, and (c) greater reliance on fossil-fired back-up capacity for grid balancing, relative to nuclear-retaining peers (France, Finland post-2023 Olkiluoto 3, Sweden, USA).

The hypothesis tests the narrow cost-reliability trade-off of nuclear phase-out as a policy choice. It does NOT evaluate the safety or waste-management argument for phase-out — those are outside the outcome set and are legitimate welfare considerations the phase-out countries weighed in their decisions.

INCONCLUSIVEengine/runs/nuclear_phaseout_grid_reliability_cost_tradeoff

inconclusive — Primary outcomes (industrial electricity price, wholesale day-ahead volatility, LOLE) remain data-gated. Eurostat NRG_PC_205 is present locally but cannot satisfy the preregistered price leg without changing the cohort/period: Eurostat NRG_PC_205 has no selected-band rows for preregistered countries: CHE, USA; Eurostat NRG_PC_205 lacks full 2010-2024 selected-band coverage for: GBR (2021,2022,2023,2024). IEA industrial prices and ENTSO-E wholesale/adequacy data are not on disk. Testable surrogate (back-up reliance via fossil share of electricity): phase-out cohort fossil-share change -13.7pp vs retain cohort -18.2pp — gap +4.5pp (NOT consistent with +5.0pp threshold). Treatment is observed: phase-out cohort nuclear share fell from 41% to 24%; retain cohort held 40% to 34%.

confidence cueResult card produced; verdict unclassified.

policy briefCoverage too thin

In ordinary language

In plain terms, this asks whether nuclear phaseout legislated dummy is actually linked to better or worse log industrial electricity price usd mwh from 2005 to 2024.

plain answer

This test cannot make a firm call yet. Primary outcomes (industrial electricity price, wholesale day-ahead volatility, LOLE) remain data-gated.

why it matters

This matters because energy claims should change belief only when they survive a pre-declared empirical test.

how the test works

It compares 10 country or place units from 2005 to 2024, using a did callaway santanna design, with fixed effects for country and year.

what was measured
What changed
  • Nuclear phaseout legislated dummy
  • Nuclear capacity share change
What we checked
  • Log industrial electricity price usd mwh
  • Wholesale price volatility
  • Fossil backup capacity factor
what this does not prove

A single test is not the whole truth. It narrows the claim under a specific sample, time period, and method. Strong policy conclusions need the pattern to survive nearby tests, alternative data, and serious objections.

verification

5 input datasets, 0 unresolved missing series, provenance status: reproducible hash verified.

Results

engine/runs/nuclear_phaseout_grid_reliability_cost_tradeoff
Loading chart…

Who has skin in the game — schools predicting on this

17 schools list this hypothesis as a test of their position. The chips below are school-level scoreboard outcomes, not a second hypothesis verdict.

hypothesis verdict vs scoreboard outcome

The banner verdict judges this hypothesis as written. The scoreboard asks whether each school's polarity-corrected prediction was right. Raw status is not a school win: SUPPORTED supports schools that needed SUPPORTED, but refutes schools that needed REFUTED.

Austrian Business Cycle Theory (ABCT)wins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callChicago School Monetarismwins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callClassical Liberalwins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callDegrowth / Ecological Macroeconomicswins if REFUTEDpartial/no-callDemocratic Socialism (Bernsteinian revisionism + modern)wins if REFUTEDpartial/no-callStructuralist / Developmentalistwins if MIXEDpartial/no-callEco-Socialism / Red-Greenwins if REFUTEDpartial/no-callEmpirical Pragmatist (the framework's house position)wins if MIXEDpartial/no-callNew Institutional Economicswins if MIXEDpartial/no-callMarket Socialism (Lange-Lerner tradition)wins if REFUTEDpartial/no-callMarxian Political Economywins if REFUTEDpartial/no-callMarxism-Leninism (central-planning implementation)wins if REFUTEDpartial/no-callModern Monetary Theorywins if REFUTEDpartial/no-callNew Keynesian (mainstream synthesis)wins if MIXEDpartial/no-callOrdoliberalism (Freiburg School)wins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callPost-Keynesianwins if REFUTEDpartial/no-callSocial Democraticwins if REFUTEDpartial/no-call

Pre-registration

pre-registered
first-spec commit 4c8ce8e · 2026-07-18T22:11:21Z

Countries that legislated and executed nuclear phase-outs (Germany 2011-2023, Belgium 2003 law with 2025-2035 phase-out, Switzerland 2017 vote) experienced over 2010-2024 (a) higher industrial electricity prices, (b) higher wholesale electricity price volatility, and (c) greater reliance on fossil-fired back-up capacity for grid balancing, relative to nuclear-retaining peers (France, Finland post-2023 Olkiluoto 3, Sweden, USA). The hypothesis tests the narrow cost-reliability trade-off of nuclear phase-out as a policy choice. It does NOT evaluate the safety or waste-management argument for phase-out — those are outside the outcome set and are legitimate welfare considerations the phase-out countries weighed in their decisions.

Falsification criterion — what would disprove this

set before the run · honoured after

This hypothesis is considered falsified if:

PRIMARY (dispositive, requires data not yet on disk): the hypothesis is SUPPORTED if (i) mean log industrial electricity price 2010-2024 in the phase-out cohort (DEU, BEL, CHE) exceeds the retain cohort (FRA, FIN, SWE, USA, GBR) by at least 0.08 log-points (~8.3%) AND (ii) wholesale day-ahead volatility CoV is higher in phase-out cohort by at least 20% AND (iii) the effect survives a drop-2021-2024 sensitivity that excludes the gas shock. REFUTED if any one of (i)-(iii) flips sign with confident methodology. Method-validity failure (data gap, FRA 2022 availability shock not handled, pre-trend RMSPE > 0.5×post-RMSPE in synth control) yields INCONCLUSIVE not refuted. SURROGATE (testable today on OWID-Ember data): mean change in fossil share of electricity 2005→2024 in phase-out cohort minus retain cohort. The hypothesis predicts a positive gap (phase-out countries leaned harder on fossils for back-up). Surrogate- supports threshold = +5pp gap. Surrogate is informative-only — it does NOT settle the cost or volatility primaries.

formal test & threshold
test:      nuclear_phaseout_cost_reliability_did
threshold: PRIMARY (price): β_phaseout on log industrial price > 0.08 at p<0.10 over 2010-2024, surviving drop-2021-2024. PRIMARY (volatility): β_phaseout on wholesale CoV > 0 at p<0.10. SURROGATE: phaseout_cohort_fossil_change_pp - retain_cohort_fossil_change_pp >= +5.0 percentage points (2005→2024).

Method

Template
did_callaway_santanna
Fixed effects
country, year
Clustering
country
Sample
10 countries · 2005 – 2024
Evidence type
causal

Primary specification: Callaway-Sant'Anna staggered DiD with treatment = legislated nuclear phase-out (DEU 2011, BEL 2003, CHE 2017). Nuclear-retaining countries form the control group. Outcome = industrial electricity price. Treatment effect heterogeneity by cohort reported. Secondary specification: continuous-treatment event-study with nuclear-capacity-share-change as intensity variable, allowing gradual phase-out to have gradual effect rather than discrete at legislation date. Third: synthetic control for DEU with donor pool from nuclear- retaining peers. The identification requires that nuclear-retaining countries are a plausible counterfactual for phase-out countries. This is strongest for DEU vs FRA (both large, advanced, EU-member, Western European) and weakest for CHE vs USA (different grid, different size). Sensitivity without USA reported. Known limitations: (1) Gas-price shock 2021-2023 is exogenous and confounds post-2020 treatment effect. Sensitivity drop 2021-2024. (2) Renewables build-out is partially substitute for nuclear; the nuclear-phaseout treatment and renewables-share control are collinear by design. Coefficient interpretation is "cost effect of phase-out net of the renewables build-out that replaced it" — which is arguably the policy-relevant object. (3) FIN added Olkiluoto 3 in 2023 — coded as "nuclear-retaining" with capacity expansion; SWE reversed earlier phase-out intent but has mixed record; these coding choices matter. (4) Loss-of-load-expectation data are not consistently reported across countries; this outcome is the weakest measured.

Data

VariableSourceTransform
log_industrial_electricity_price_usd_mwh
outcome
constructed:IEA industrial electricity price (band IC, medium industry) + Eurostat NRG_PC_205 cross-check, USD/MWh constant 2020. Sptier 5
log
wholesale_price_volatility
outcome
constructed:annual coefficient of variation of day-ahead wholesale electricity prices (EPEX, Nord Pool, ENTSO-E transparency platfortier 5
level
fossil_backup_capacity_factor
outcome
constructed:ENTSO-E + EIA annual capacity factor of fossil-fired (gas + coal) plants, as proxy for back-up reliance. Fetcher pendingtier 5
level
loss_of_load_expectation_hours
outcome
constructed:ENTSO-E MAF / NERC equivalent reserve-adequacy indicator; interpolation required across non-harmonised reporting. Fetchetier 5
level
nuclear_phaseout_legislated_dummy
treatment
constructed:indicator = 1 in years after a country legislated a binding nuclear phase-out. DEU 2011+, BEL 2003+ (law), CHE 2017+ (retier 5
indicator
nuclear_capacity_share_change
treatment
constructed:year-over-year change in nuclear share of electricity generation, BP Statistical Review / IEA electricity statistics. Cotier 5
level
gas_price_eu_ttf_proxy
control
constructed:TTF-equivalent natural gas price (EUR/MWh) to partial out gas-shock exposure common to gas-indexed markets. Fetcher pendtier 5
log
renewable_capacity_share
control
constructed:IEA / IRENA wind + solar share of installed capacity. Fetcher pending.tier 5
level
interconnection_capacity_per_capita
control
constructed:ENTSO-E interconnection NTC / population. Fetcher pending.tier 5
level
log_population
control
world_bank_wdi:SP.POP.TOTLtier 2
log

● ready  · ● pending  · ● reconstruct-needed

Detailed result card

Nuclear phase-out — grid reliability / cost trade-off

Verdict: inconclusive — Primary outcomes (industrial electricity price, wholesale day-ahead volatility, LOLE) remain data-gated. Eurostat NRG_PC_205 is present locally but cannot satisfy the preregistered price leg without changing the cohort/period: Eurostat NRG_PC_205 has no selected-band rows for preregistered countries: CHE, USA; Eurostat NRG_PC_205 lacks full 2010-2024 selected-band coverage for: GBR (2021,2022,2023,2024). IEA industrial prices and ENTSO-E wholesale/adequacy data are not on disk. Testable surrogate (back-up reliance via fossil share of electricity): phase-out cohort fossil-share change -13.7pp vs retain cohort -18.2pp — gap +4.5pp (NOT consistent with +5.0pp threshold). Treatment is observed: phase-out cohort nuclear share fell from 41% to 24%; retain cohort held 40% to 34%.

Summary

  • The spec's PRIMARY outcomes are industrial electricity price, wholesale day-ahead volatility, fossil-fired back-up capacity factor, and loss-of-load expectation. Eurostat NRG_PC_205 is now on disk, but it does not cover the full preregistered industrial-price cohort/period. The IEA industrial-price and ENTSO-E wholesale/adequacy vintages are still absent, so the headline tests cannot be run without lowering the bar; verdict is structurally inconclusive.

  • The third primary (fossil back-up reliance) has an OWID-Ember surrogate: share-electricity-fossil-fuels. As a check on whether the testable piece points the way the spec predicts:

    • Phase-out cohort (DEU, BEL, CHE) fossil-share change 2005→2024: -13.7pp
    • Retain cohort (FRA, FIN, SWE, USA, GBR) fossil-share change 2005→2024: -18.2pp
    • Gap: +4.5pp (surrogate does NOT support the +5.0pp threshold)

  • Treatment is verifiable: phase-out cohort nuclear-share declined materially while retain cohort held steady. See diagnostics.json for the country-level breakout.

  • Renewables build-out: phase-out cohort +30.9pp, retain cohort +24.0pp — phase-out countries deployed renewables harder, partially substituting for the removed nuclear capacity (consistent with the spec's acknowledged collinearity).

  • CO2-intensity of GDP: phase-out cohort -46.4%, retain cohort -46.1% — both decarbonising; phase-out cohort started higher and converged.

Blocker audit

Eurostat NRG_PC_205 coverage audit for the preregistered price leg (E7000, band MWH500-1999, I_TAX, EUR; required years 2010–2024):

| country | cohort | Eurostat geo | rows | first–last year | missing required years | | --- | --- | --- | ---: | --- | --- | | DEU | phaseout | DE | 38 | 2007-2025 | none | | BEL | phaseout | BE | 37 | 2007-2025 | none | | CHE | phaseout | CH | 0 | none | 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 | | FRA | retain | FR | 37 | 2007-2025 | none | | FIN | retain | FI | 38 | 2007-2025 | none | | SWE | retain | SE | 38 | 2007-2025 | none | | USA | retain | US | 0 | none | 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 | | GBR | retain | UK | 27 | 2007-2020 | 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 |

Primary blockers:

  • Eurostat NRG_PC_205 has no selected-band rows for preregistered countries: CHE, USA.
  • Eurostat NRG_PC_205 lacks full 2010-2024 selected-band coverage for: GBR (2021,2022,2023,2024).
  • No local ENTSO-E/EPEX/Nord Pool day-ahead wholesale-price vintage exists.
  • No local ENTSO-E/EIA fossil capacity-factor vintage exists; OWID fossil share remains an informative surrogate only.
  • No local ENTSO-E MAF/NERC loss-of-load-expectation vintage exists.

Method

Period: 2005–2024. Phase-out cohort: DEU, BEL, CHE. Retain cohort: FRA, FIN, SWE, USA, GBR. Sensitivity cohort (excluded from primary cohorts): JPN, KOR.

Why inconclusive, not refuted/supported:

Per HYPOTHESIS_FRAMEWORK_AUDIT.md §E2, a method-valid failure (here: data gap on the headline outcomes) yields inconclusive, NOT refuted. Substituting a different series for industrial-electricity-price would violate provenance. The surrogate (fossil share) is reported as informative evidence only — it shares the spec's spirit on back-up reliance but does NOT settle the cost-of-electricity primary.

Specialist fetchers needed for v2:

  • iea:industrial_electricity_price (band IC) — no local vintage/manual drop on disk
  • eurostat:nrg_pc_205 (industry electricity price) — local vintage present but incomplete for preregistered cohort/period; see diagnostics.primary_coverage_audit
  • entsoe:day_ahead_wholesale_prices — fetcher pending
  • entsoe:fossil_capacity_factor — fetcher pending
  • entsoe:MAF_LOLE — fetcher pending

Data

  • owid:share-electricity-nuclear (Ember-derived; treatment verification)
  • owid:share-electricity-fossil-fuels (Ember-derived; surrogate for back-up reliance)
  • owid:share-electricity-renewables (Ember-derived; informative)
  • owid:co2-intensity (informative)

Caveats

  • France's 2022 reactor-availability crisis (stress-corrosion cracking, ~half the fleet derated) confounds the FRA-as-control story for the gas-shock window. Steelman point #1.
  • Gas-price shock 2022-2024 dominates any cost-outcome data and is geographically correlated with the phase-out cohort. Steelman point #2; the planned drop-2021-2024 sensitivity needs the missing price data.
  • BEL extended Doel 4 / Tihange 3 beyond planned phase-out; CHE phase-out is passive. Treatment intensity is heterogeneous (steelman point #5).
  • Safety / waste-management benefits — the actual reasons for phase-out — are unmeasured here. The hypothesis answers a narrow trade-off question, not a net-welfare question.

Strongest opposing argument

Every hypothesis ships with its charitable opposing argument. The framework earns credibility by handling objections at their strongest, not weakest.

Notes

Data readiness: - IEA industrial electricity price — no local vintage/manual drop on disk - ENTSO-E transparency platform (wholesale prices, interconnection, MAF reserve adequacy) — non-trivial fetcher pending - BP Statistical Review / IEA electricity statistics — pending - IRENA renewables capacity — pending - Eurostat NRG_PC_205 — local vintages present, but incomplete for the preregistered 2010-2024 primary price cohort (missing CHE and USA selected-band rows; UK/GBR stops before 2021) - EIA electricity data — pending v1 pre-registers; v1.1 runs when ENTSO-E + IEA + IRENA fetchers ship.

Authored framework. Read the transparency note.