4 ms·

I'm all for more nuclear, but FYI, nuclear plants were affected like everything else in Texas this week: https://atomicinsights.com/south-texas-project-unit-1-t

I'm all for more nuclear, but FYI, nuclear plants were affected like everything else in Texas this week: https://atomicinsights.com/south-texas-project-unit-1-tripped-at-0537-on-feb-15-2021/ https://atomicinsights.com/south-texas-project-unit-1-trippe... Ideally new ones would be designed better to avoid this possibility, but new nuclear plants take a minimum of 5 years if you're really sprinting. It's probably the most difficult, expensive, and time-consuming option compared to weather-hardening existing power plants and building new wind, solar, and storage.

ashtonkem 6y ago
No type of power plant is immune to mismanagement, sadly.
cbmuser 6y ago
That plant is already back online: > https://twitter.com/Beazy_Rampezy/status/1362043827800977414 https://twitter.com/Beazy_Rampezy/status/1362043827800977414 The average capacity of nuclear across the US is never below 90% which is far better than any other source of energy. Wind is 25% capacity factor on average, solar 10% and natural gas around 50~60%. So while the tripping of STP1 was unlucky, the plant was just offline for a short time providing how extreme reliable it is.