4 ms·

But you cannot use 100% renewable energy without some storage technology not currently known. Nuclear is the only carbon free energy source we have that can sup

But you cannot use 100% renewable energy without some storage technology not currently known. Nuclear is the only carbon free energy source we have that can supply power reliably.

ZeroGravitas 6y ago
Nuclear has a similar problem once you get near 100%, the demand isn't actually flat (spikes during daylight and winter) andthe seasonal variation differs around the globe. Tge solutions are similar too, build nore so you can cover the peak, or build storage to buffer in the short and long term. Once you start buffering, you would choose to overbuild renewables because its cheaper. Nuclear has a very niche future around 5% of global energy, Solar and wind will be doing the heavy lifting.
nl 6y ago
This just isn't true. With geographical redundancy, pump storage and some batteries (or alternatives) you can get the reliability of the current grid. In 2015 (before the introduction of large scale battery storage) they studied this in Texas and showed how little was required for grid stability. In this case they used natural gas (which remain an option), but nowadays there are completely renewable solutions. Note that this covers more than 10% of the entire electricity generation capacity of Texas. > In a study commissioned by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, General Electric calculated how much new reserve capacity will be required as Texas increases the amount of wind energy installed. The report found that an additional 15,000 megawatts of installed wind energy only requires an additional 18 megawatts of new flexible reserve capacity to maintain the stability of the grid. In other words, the spare capacity of one fast-ramping natural gas power plant can compensate for the variability introduced by 5,000 new average-sized wind turbines. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/plugged-in/renewable-energy-intermittency-explained-challenges-solutions-and-opportunities/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/plugged-in/renewable-en...
imtringued 6y ago
>But you cannot use 100% renewable energy without some storage technology not currently known. Tell me what storage are we currently missing? We have capacitors, flywheels, an uncountable number of battery chemistries, pumped hydro, power to gas and curtailment. We even have exotic storage technologies in the TWh range. I'll tell you what we are currently missing. We are missing electric grids that have a high enough renewable share to even think about storage. As long as you have a flexible grid you can always make up the lack of electricity on a given day with fossil fuels but if you don't produce excess energy in the first place, storing it is pointless.

But you cannot use 100% renewable energy without some storage technology not currently known. Nuclear is the only carbon free energy source we have that can supply power reliably.

ZeroGravitas 6y ago

Nuclear has a similar problem once you get near 100%, the demand isn't actually flat (spikes during daylight and winter) andthe seasonal variation differs around the globe. Tge solutions are similar too, build nore so you can cover the peak, or build storage to buffer in the short and long term. Once you start buffering, you would choose to overbuild renewables because its cheaper. Nuclear has a very niche future around 5% of global energy, Solar and wind will be doing the heavy lifting.

nl 6y ago

This just isn't true. With geographical redundancy, pump storage and some batteries (or alternatives) you can get the reliability of the current grid. In 2015 (before the introduction of large scale battery storage) they studied this in Texas and showed how little was required for grid stability. In this case they used natural gas (which remain an option), but nowadays there are completely renewable solutions. Note that this covers more than 10% of the entire electricity generation capacity of Texas. > In a study commissioned by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, General Electric calculated how much new reserve capacity will be required as Texas increases the amount of wind energy installed. The report found that an additional 15,000 megawatts of installed wind energy only requires an additional 18 megawatts of new flexible reserve capacity to maintain the stability of the grid. In other words, the spare capacity of one fast-ramping natural gas power plant can compensate for the variability introduced by 5,000 new average-sized wind turbines. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/plugged-in/renewable-energy-intermittency-explained-challenges-solutions-and-opportunities/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/plugged-in/renewable-en...

imtringued 6y ago

>But you cannot use 100% renewable energy without some storage technology not currently known. Tell me what storage are we currently missing? We have capacitors, flywheels, an uncountable number of battery chemistries, pumped hydro, power to gas and curtailment. We even have exotic storage technologies in the TWh range. I'll tell you what we are currently missing. We are missing electric grids that have a high enough renewable share to even think about storage. As long as you have a flexible grid you can always make up the lack of electricity on a given day with fossil fuels but if you don't produce excess energy in the first place, storing it is pointless.