3 ms·

Because that is based on the assumption that renewables and no nuclear is viable and going to work based on advances in technology. I think there is enough deb

• pfdietz 8y ago
  It's difficult to see how nuclear can fit in, even if renewables aren't directly covering everything. Renewables will be intermittent, which means as they build out they will often crash the price of electrical power. Nuclear cannot do well in that environment, since it cannot dispatch economically. Its costs are largely fixed, and it depends on selling power at a good price averaged over the large fraction of time it needs to be operating. But renewables slash the price it can get much of the time, even if they cannot cover everything. If nuclear is reduced to covering (say) 20% of the time cheap renewables are not available, it's a dead technology. Something else, like using hydrogen produced from renewables during their high output times, will be used instead.