I strongly support nuclear, but there are key benefits to incorporating more transmission as wind and solar are added to the grid. Both utility scale wind and

I strongly support nuclear, but there are key benefits to incorporating more transmission as wind and solar are added to the grid. Both utility scale wind and solar are the cheapest forms of energy. But they occur in concentrated, geographically changing areas. I.e. a high pressure system creates a cloudless sky, great for solar and but wind. And 1,500 miles a way a low pressure system is creating tons of wind but no solar. The most cost efficient way to balance such a grid is to use large amounts of transmission to 'smooth out' these geographic correlations - moving the solar and wind to places where the other is absent. Only large scale transmission can create a full transmission to a zero carbon wind with about 20% of the total provided by nuclear. You can add more nuclear, but then it increases the total cost of the zero carbon system. [1] [1] https://www.vibrantcleanenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Future_cost-competitive_electricity_syst.pdf https://www.vibrantcleanenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/0...