3 ms·

Well as I said, cost should always be a consideration, but deliberately ignoring costs of some choices is not helpful. The levelized cost for residential rooft

by opo 6y ago

Well as I said, cost should always be a consideration, but deliberately ignoring costs of some choices is not helpful. The levelized cost for residential rooftop solar is about as high as nuclear, but that cost doesn't seem to matter to some advocates and they continue to strongly support subsidizing it. Why is that? Do you also consider rooftop solar a very expensive part of a solution, or do those costs not matter? The prices for utility solar and wind have come down dramatically which is great news. Unfortunately these sources have low capacity factors and can only achieve so much market penetration before some combination of very expensive energy storage or transmission or overbuilding would become necessary. Do these costs not matter and there is no need to consider them? Right now, no effort is made to collect the CO2 from burning natural gas nor the atmospheric losses from collecting/distributing natural gas - if people were required to prevent those external costs the price for natural gas would dramatically increase. Do those costs not matter? >...Coming in on time and within budget is the worst imaginable outcome for the project's backers. Conspiracy theories here are not helpful.

ncmncm 6y ago
By definition, it is not a conspiracy if it is legal. Nobody is being indicted for nuke plant construction cost overruns, any more than for F-35 hemorrhage. That doesn't mean anybody meant for it not to happen. And the only big open question about storage is which will prove cheapest for each case. Underground compressed air? Mineshaft gravitational? Tower gravitational? None of those depend on any new tech. Ammonia (more expensive, but also more useful, in excess)? Hydrogen (likewise)? Batteries are expensive just now, but those prices are also in free-fall. The only reason you don't see much of that yet is that it hasn't been needed, and dollars are much better-spent right now building out generating capacity. Then there is geothermal, which can now be done anywhere, and doesn't need storage. It uses the same tech, equipment, and staff as are used for drilling fracking wells.
- opo 6y ago
  >By definition, it is not a conspiracy if it is legal. That might be your personal definition, but a common definition is: "a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful" >...The only reason you don't see much of that yet is that it hasn't been needed Contrary to what advocates claim, people have been looking at grid energy storage for decades and it isn't as simple as they claim. So far the only noticeable thing that has been able to implemented has been pumped hydro. It is possible new grid storage technologies will be designed/implemented in the coming decades, but it will be a challenge. One estimate is that for Germany to rely solely on solar and wind would require about 6,000 pumped storage plants which is literally 183 times their current capacity. This is why Bill Gates is investing in energy storage companies and 4th gen nuclear.
  - ncmncm 6y ago
    Conspiracy is defined in criminal law. You cannot be convicted of conspiracy for activity that is legal. You can make up any random other meaning you like, for any word, but sticking with dictionary meanings enables clear communication. Grid energy storage requires no new technology. It isn't used yet most places purely because it hasn't been needed yet. Absent carbon tax, natural gas has been much cheaper, thus far. Bill Gates does what Bill Gates does for reasons that Bill Gates is not obliged to be open or honest about. We may each draw our own conclusions.
    - opo 6y ago
      >…Conspiracy is defined in criminal law. You cannot be convicted of conspiracy for activity that is legal. You can make up any random other meaning you like, for any word … Please don't try and misrepresent what I wrote. You wrote: >>…Coming in on time and within budget is the worst imaginable outcome for the project's backers. I wrote: >Conspiracy theories here are not helpful. You then continue and continue to appear to be claiming that since you didn't claim it was illegal that you aren't describing a conspiracy. I never claimed you said it was illegal. I simply said that conspiracy theories here are not helpful. (If my meaning wasn't obvious, I don't think conspiracy theories help understand complex issues of this sort.) My use of the word conspiracy is based on a common definition. (Indeed the first result from a google search is "a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful"). You may have your own personal definition that limits it to only illegal activities, but that is your issue. Sticking with the dictionary meaning enables clear communication. >…Grid energy storage requires no new technology. It isn't used yet most places purely because it hasn't been needed yet. … Yes, I understand you are convinced of that.

by opo 6y ago

ncmncm 6y ago

By definition, it is not a conspiracy if it is legal. Nobody is being indicted for nuke plant construction cost overruns, any more than for F-35 hemorrhage. That doesn't mean anybody meant for it not to happen. And the only big open question about storage is which will prove cheapest for each case. Underground compressed air? Mineshaft gravitational? Tower gravitational? None of those depend on any new tech. Ammonia (more expensive, but also more useful, in excess)? Hydrogen (likewise)? Batteries are expensive just now, but those prices are also in free-fall. The only reason you don't see much of that yet is that it hasn't been needed, and dollars are much better-spent right now building out generating capacity. Then there is geothermal, which can now be done anywhere, and doesn't need storage. It uses the same tech, equipment, and staff as are used for drilling fracking wells.

opo 6y ago
>By definition, it is not a conspiracy if it is legal. That might be your personal definition, but a common definition is: "a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful" >...The only reason you don't see much of that yet is that it hasn't been needed Contrary to what advocates claim, people have been looking at grid energy storage for decades and it isn't as simple as they claim. So far the only noticeable thing that has been able to implemented has been pumped hydro. It is possible new grid storage technologies will be designed/implemented in the coming decades, but it will be a challenge. One estimate is that for Germany to rely solely on solar and wind would require about 6,000 pumped storage plants which is literally 183 times their current capacity. This is why Bill Gates is investing in energy storage companies and 4th gen nuclear.
- ncmncm 6y ago
  Conspiracy is defined in criminal law. You cannot be convicted of conspiracy for activity that is legal. You can make up any random other meaning you like, for any word, but sticking with dictionary meanings enables clear communication. Grid energy storage requires no new technology. It isn't used yet most places purely because it hasn't been needed yet. Absent carbon tax, natural gas has been much cheaper, thus far. Bill Gates does what Bill Gates does for reasons that Bill Gates is not obliged to be open or honest about. We may each draw our own conclusions.
  - opo 6y ago
    >…Conspiracy is defined in criminal law. You cannot be convicted of conspiracy for activity that is legal. You can make up any random other meaning you like, for any word … Please don't try and misrepresent what I wrote. You wrote: >>…Coming in on time and within budget is the worst imaginable outcome for the project's backers. I wrote: >Conspiracy theories here are not helpful. You then continue and continue to appear to be claiming that since you didn't claim it was illegal that you aren't describing a conspiracy. I never claimed you said it was illegal. I simply said that conspiracy theories here are not helpful. (If my meaning wasn't obvious, I don't think conspiracy theories help understand complex issues of this sort.) My use of the word conspiracy is based on a common definition. (Indeed the first result from a google search is "a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful"). You may have your own personal definition that limits it to only illegal activities, but that is your issue. Sticking with the dictionary meaning enables clear communication. >…Grid energy storage requires no new technology. It isn't used yet most places purely because it hasn't been needed yet. … Yes, I understand you are convinced of that.