4 ms·

> uninhabitable by hydroelectric dams Nobody builds one where I live. But there are several nuclear power plants. But most of them are now history. They are no

by lispm 10y ago

> uninhabitable by hydroelectric dams Nobody builds one where I live. But there are several nuclear power plants. But most of them are now history. They are not in some remote areas, but near populated areas with millions of people. > If you're considering solar on its own then you're never going to be able to provide reliable baseline power. Why would I 'consider solar on its own' as baseline power? These arguments were brought up twenty years ago and were boring then. Even though there are solar power plants which store heat. The biggest achievement of the Energiewende is that it has broken up the big electricity monopolies of the nuclear- and fossil-based electricity companies. It has enabled two decades of exciting research into new technologies and enabled distributed energy production by much smaller players. It's a paradigm shift like it was from few Mainframe computers to the distributed nature of the modern Internet.

lmm 10y ago
> Nobody builds one where I live. But there are several nuclear power plants. But most of them are now history. They are not in some remote areas, but near populated areas with millions of people. This is a failure of planning (or possibly of international diplomacy in the case of e.g. Japan). In terms of the engineering constraints, nuclear plants are a lot easier to build far away from people than any of the alternatives: they don't have to be built on particular parts of rivers, or in a sunny or windy area, or a gas pipeline or an endless supply of mile-long coal trains. (They probably do have to be on some kind of rail line just because fuel transport is excessively regulated). > Why would I 'consider solar on its own' as baseline power? These arguments were brought up twenty years ago and were boring then. It may be boring, but the issues are still real. Baseline power is a requirement, and the only proven ways to provide it are carbon-based, hydro, or nuclear. > Even though there are solar power plants which store heat. There was only ever one in full-scale production, and it's now closed, AIUI. There are various experimental efforts.
- alphydan 10y ago
  You need to revisit your facts. Solar plants with storage are currently in operation [1] [2]. They have been producing 370GWh per year. This is tiny compared to a mid-sized nuclear power plant, but the technology is there and is easy to scale up without hazards. [1] http://torresolenergy.com/TORRESOL/valles.html?swlang=en http://torresolenergy.com/TORRESOL/valles.html?swlang=en [2] http://torresolenergy.com/TORRESOL/gemasolar.html?swlang=en http://torresolenergy.com/TORRESOL/gemasolar.html?swlang=en
  - lmm 10y ago
    I think it's fair to characterize a 50MW plant as "experimental" or at least "not in full-scale production".
    - alphydan 10y ago
      You will agree then that a 10kW residential solar installation on a roof is "experimental" and "not in full-scale production". What about the 1 million residential solar installations done in 2016? Is that "experimental"? When you add 20 100MW plants, you reach the scale of a nuclear plant. That is precisely the beauty of solar. That it can grow incrementally without high capital costs (unlike borrowing $4bn and a huge insurance at once with nuclear).
      - lmm 10y ago
        Whether PV solar is in full-scale production is irrelevant, because PV can't supply baseline power.
- lispm 10y ago
  > This is a failure of planning It has to do with costs, lack of space, various engineering and environmental constraints, business decisions, ... > nuclear plants are a lot easier to build far away from people than any of the alternatives There is no far away from people in Europe. Even in Russia they have built their new dangerous breeder next to a large town. Keeps the engineers committed to the thing... > Baseline power is a requirement For what? > carbon-based, hydro, or nuclear. Biomass. >There was only ever one in full-scale production, and it's now closed, AIUI. There are various experimental efforts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_thermal_power_stations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_thermal_power_st...
  - lmm 10y ago
    >> Baseline power is a requirement > For what? Modern civilization. > Biomass. Still carbon-based. Burning x tonnes of hydrocarbons is still burning x tonnes of hydrocarbons even if the carbon was only recently captured from the atmosphere - it's basically no different from burning coal and running a sequestration process in parallel. Carbon is fungible.

by lispm 10y ago

lmm 10y ago

> Nobody builds one where I live. But there are several nuclear power plants. But most of them are now history. They are not in some remote areas, but near populated areas with millions of people. This is a failure of planning (or possibly of international diplomacy in the case of e.g. Japan). In terms of the engineering constraints, nuclear plants are a lot easier to build far away from people than any of the alternatives: they don't have to be built on particular parts of rivers, or in a sunny or windy area, or a gas pipeline or an endless supply of mile-long coal trains. (They probably do have to be on some kind of rail line just because fuel transport is excessively regulated). > Why would I 'consider solar on its own' as baseline power? These arguments were brought up twenty years ago and were boring then. It may be boring, but the issues are still real. Baseline power is a requirement, and the only proven ways to provide it are carbon-based, hydro, or nuclear. > Even though there are solar power plants which store heat. There was only ever one in full-scale production, and it's now closed, AIUI. There are various experimental efforts.

alphydan 10y ago
You need to revisit your facts. Solar plants with storage are currently in operation [1] [2]. They have been producing 370GWh per year. This is tiny compared to a mid-sized nuclear power plant, but the technology is there and is easy to scale up without hazards. [1] http://torresolenergy.com/TORRESOL/valles.html?swlang=en http://torresolenergy.com/TORRESOL/valles.html?swlang=en [2] http://torresolenergy.com/TORRESOL/gemasolar.html?swlang=en http://torresolenergy.com/TORRESOL/gemasolar.html?swlang=en
- lmm 10y ago
  I think it's fair to characterize a 50MW plant as "experimental" or at least "not in full-scale production".
  - alphydan 10y ago
    You will agree then that a 10kW residential solar installation on a roof is "experimental" and "not in full-scale production". What about the 1 million residential solar installations done in 2016? Is that "experimental"? When you add 20 100MW plants, you reach the scale of a nuclear plant. That is precisely the beauty of solar. That it can grow incrementally without high capital costs (unlike borrowing $4bn and a huge insurance at once with nuclear).
    - lmm 10y ago
      Whether PV solar is in full-scale production is irrelevant, because PV can't supply baseline power.
lispm 10y ago
> This is a failure of planning It has to do with costs, lack of space, various engineering and environmental constraints, business decisions, ... > nuclear plants are a lot easier to build far away from people than any of the alternatives There is no far away from people in Europe. Even in Russia they have built their new dangerous breeder next to a large town. Keeps the engineers committed to the thing... > Baseline power is a requirement For what? > carbon-based, hydro, or nuclear. Biomass. >There was only ever one in full-scale production, and it's now closed, AIUI. There are various experimental efforts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_thermal_power_stations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_thermal_power_st...
- lmm 10y ago
  >> Baseline power is a requirement > For what? Modern civilization. > Biomass. Still carbon-based. Burning x tonnes of hydrocarbons is still burning x tonnes of hydrocarbons even if the carbon was only recently captured from the atmosphere - it's basically no different from burning coal and running a sequestration process in parallel. Carbon is fungible.