3 ms·
A good argument against (long-term) storage could be that it does not exist yet. Not in commercial quantities at least. I think it would be accurate to state we
by brnt 7y ago
A good argument against (long-term) storage could be that it does not exist yet. Not in commercial quantities at least. I think it would be accurate to state we can build nuclear in sufficient required TWh's right now, but we could not do the same for the storage we would need in a 100% renewable scenario.
More and more I think we just don't have the time for research anymore, and we should prioritize getting rid of carbon over going as green as possible. (Naturally I will agree that renewable is ultimately better than non-renewable nuclear.)
- pfdietz 7y agoAh, the old "nothing ever happens for the first time" argument. A terrible argument, actually. Hydrogen storage underground is a proved technology, already in use. Hydrogen pipelines exist. I'd argument the step to using hydrogen for long term storage is much more plausible than that nuclear will suddenly get off the failure curve where it gets more expensive over time rather than cheaper.
- brnt 7y agoI'd love to see you support your argument!