5 ms·

Isn’t the issue that the windmill also needs a large battery to meet demand?

pfdietz 6y ago
Storage is needed, but storage has finite cost, and the cost is falling rapidly. Nuclear's window of opportunity is now closed.
- shuckles 6y ago
  All of that is irrelevant to the argument that wind wins because it’s simpler, which is what I was trying to engage with.
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  Far from it. After years of promotion, investment and development, wind and solar energy prices dropped 10-20x in the last decades. Same cost reduction can very well happen with nuclear power, and it'll take far less space than solar and wind, will disrupt the nature less, and will be much more reliable and predictable, capable of producing energy on demand and not requiring any storage.
  - pfdietz 6y ago
    Nuclear had many decades in which its cost could drop. That failed to happen. Unlike with renewables, nuclear never had relentless cost decline. Its learning curve has even shown negative learning, with costs rising with time rather than falling. There's something about nuclear that just keeps it from getting cheaper. The scale and complexity of nuclear plants probably has something to do with it, and also the maturity of the non-nuclear side.
    - Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
      For the past 40+ years there was an non-stop ongoing attack on nuclear energy. See "china syndrome" for more info. Fear-mongering is _the reason_ for the absence of progress and rising prices, not some technical obstacles.
      - pfdietz 6y ago
        Fear mongering must be incredibly powerful, if it has universally stopped nuclear from getting much (or at all) cheaper, everywhere in the world, in multiple cultures. Much more plausibly, the technology itself is to blame.
_carbyau_ 6y ago
Yes-ish. Although there are other options like pumped hydro (pump the water back up the hill) though clearly that has logistical limits.
Nasrudith 6y ago
That is solar - wind can work through geographic distribution alone without so much as a potato battery. A local area may be becalmed by wind but since temperature differentials produce wind and the earth rotates into and out of the sun the only things which would lead to no wind render the power generation question a moot point. Grid scale batteries make wind cheaper by allowing less overproduction but they do that for everything by assisting grid balance and acting as a form of high frequency trading which is productive in ways other than increased market liquidity.

Storage is needed, but storage has finite cost, and the cost is falling rapidly. Nuclear's window of opportunity is now closed.

shuckles 6y ago
All of that is irrelevant to the argument that wind wins because it’s simpler, which is what I was trying to engage with.
Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
Far from it. After years of promotion, investment and development, wind and solar energy prices dropped 10-20x in the last decades. Same cost reduction can very well happen with nuclear power, and it'll take far less space than solar and wind, will disrupt the nature less, and will be much more reliable and predictable, capable of producing energy on demand and not requiring any storage.
- pfdietz 6y ago
  Nuclear had many decades in which its cost could drop. That failed to happen. Unlike with renewables, nuclear never had relentless cost decline. Its learning curve has even shown negative learning, with costs rising with time rather than falling. There's something about nuclear that just keeps it from getting cheaper. The scale and complexity of nuclear plants probably has something to do with it, and also the maturity of the non-nuclear side.
  - Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
    For the past 40+ years there was an non-stop ongoing attack on nuclear energy. See "china syndrome" for more info. Fear-mongering is _the reason_ for the absence of progress and rising prices, not some technical obstacles.
    - pfdietz 6y ago
      Fear mongering must be incredibly powerful, if it has universally stopped nuclear from getting much (or at all) cheaper, everywhere in the world, in multiple cultures. Much more plausibly, the technology itself is to blame.

_carbyau_ 6y ago

Yes-ish. Although there are other options like pumped hydro (pump the water back up the hill) though clearly that has logistical limits.

Nasrudith 6y ago

That is solar - wind can work through geographic distribution alone without so much as a potato battery. A local area may be becalmed by wind but since temperature differentials produce wind and the earth rotates into and out of the sun the only things which would lead to no wind render the power generation question a moot point. Grid scale batteries make wind cheaper by allowing less overproduction but they do that for everything by assisting grid balance and acting as a form of high frequency trading which is productive in ways other than increased market liquidity.