2 ms·

So... backed by about 24 to 48 hours of storage, and overbuilt by a factor of 2 to 3 (so you curtail most of your energy), wind and solar can produce reliable,

So... backed by about 24 to 48 hours of storage, and overbuilt by a factor of 2 to 3 (so you curtail most of your energy), wind and solar can produce reliable, baseload power. Particularly if you connect geographically separated regions and use wind/solar (and possibly geo/hydro) together. The cost is about the same as nuclear. We should do everything, though, including nuclear. i'm a big nuclear fan. All at once, right now.

klingonopera 7y ago
If the cost is the same as nuclear, it should be preferred, as there is no nuclear waste. And that's probably even also considering that both the actual cost of nuclear[0][1][2][3], as well as the risk of failure[4][5] and the therein resulting costs[6] are often wildly underestimated. [0]: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4631737.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4631737.stm [1]: https://www.pv-magazine.com/2019/01/31/debunking-the-low-cost-nuclear-myth/ https://www.pv-magazine.com/2019/01/31/debunking-the-low-cos... [2]: https://financialtribune.com/articles/energy/9386/nuclear-decommissioning-cost-underestimated https://financialtribune.com/articles/energy/9386/nuclear-de... [3]: https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/true-cost-of-nuclear-power-1.3415825 https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/true-cost-of-nucl... [4]: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4543400/Scientists-warn-nuclear-regulators-underestimate-risk.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4543400/Scie... [5]: https://phys.org/news/2017-05-nuclear-greatly-underestimate-potential-disaster.html https://phys.org/news/2017-05-nuclear-greatly-underestimate-... [6]: https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/16/fukushimas-final-costs-will-approach-one-trillion-dollars-just-for-nuclear-disaster/ https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/16/fukushimas-final-costs-...
- Robotbeat 7y ago
  I'm including the wildly inflated costs, here. And it only works at lower latitudes. At high latitudes, it's not viable.

klingonopera 7y ago

If the cost is the same as nuclear, it should be preferred, as there is no nuclear waste. And that's probably even also considering that both the actual cost of nuclear[0][1][2][3], as well as the risk of failure[4][5] and the therein resulting costs[6] are often wildly underestimated. [0]: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4631737.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4631737.stm [1]: https://www.pv-magazine.com/2019/01/31/debunking-the-low-cost-nuclear-myth/ https://www.pv-magazine.com/2019/01/31/debunking-the-low-cos... [2]: https://financialtribune.com/articles/energy/9386/nuclear-decommissioning-cost-underestimated https://financialtribune.com/articles/energy/9386/nuclear-de... [3]: https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/true-cost-of-nuclear-power-1.3415825 https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/true-cost-of-nucl... [4]: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4543400/Scientists-warn-nuclear-regulators-underestimate-risk.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4543400/Scie... [5]: https://phys.org/news/2017-05-nuclear-greatly-underestimate-potential-disaster.html https://phys.org/news/2017-05-nuclear-greatly-underestimate-... [6]: https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/16/fukushimas-final-costs-will-approach-one-trillion-dollars-just-for-nuclear-disaster/ https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/16/fukushimas-final-costs-...

Robotbeat 7y ago
I'm including the wildly inflated costs, here. And it only works at lower latitudes. At high latitudes, it's not viable.