3 ms·
The important flaw in your argument is the use of the word average. A grid cannot make use of average power generation. It needs consistent power generation.
by koheripbal 7y ago
The important flaw in your argument is the use of the word average.
A grid cannot make use of average power generation. It needs consistent power generation.
...and storage needed to make that happen is orders of magnitude higher than what's being factored in here.
- Retric 7y agoBatteries inherently allow for peaking power, it’s nuclear that has issues with fluctuations in demand. So, by average I mean how much are you able to use directly vs how much do you need to store in batteries. To be more clear only using solar with battery backup you can provide 24/7 power that covers demand but at lower costs per kWh than current nuclear numbers operating 24/7 and vastly lower than trying to reach 100% nuclear generation in almost every country.
- stjohnswarts 7y agoYour argument is completely shot down by the mere fact that 75% of France's power is provided by nuclear energy.
- Retric 7y agoNope, ~60% of France’s power is provided by nuclear while 71.6% of it’s power production is nuclear. They export 86.3 TWh almost entirely nuclear power and import 26.1 TWh almost entirely non nuclear power (2016). Even then their nuclear capacity factor is 77% where it’s generally 90+% in the US because frequently nobody want’s to import electricity from France. So, France’s high percentage of nuclear power results roughly 17% higher costs per kWh for nuclear power due to oversupply. Or more depending on what it exports at. Further, the more you increase nuclear capacity globally, the less anyone is going to be importing it at night and weekends when everyone is over supplied.