4 ms·

this is an oversimplified and thus misleading comparison. A nuclear (or any fuel-controlled generator) can generate power at-will i.e. on demand. No wind or so

this is an oversimplified and thus misleading comparison. A nuclear (or any fuel-controlled generator) can generate power at-will i.e. on demand. No wind or solar generator can do this and before you say batteries, no battery in existence can power a medium-sized city for more than a few minutes. These comparisons are usually presented as an aggregated amount of energy over a year and completely ignore the fact that at some points in time, the power output of entire fleets of wind and solar generators is zero.

cogman10 5y ago
What? This infographic is proving the point that nuclear generates a BUNCH of power and a single plant would require vast amounts of renewables to replace it. Did you actually read it before ranting? > No wind or solar generator can do this and before you say batteries, no battery in existence can power a medium-sized city for more than a few minutes. This is a silly argument. The only real limiting factor on the capacity of a battery, at this point, is manufacturing capacity. That is changing very quickly as more than a few companies are looking at expanding their battery production capabilities. Beyond that, grid batteries are good for any grid configuration. Batteries have rapid response to demand surplus and deficits. They are a grid stabilizing technology. Even if we had a 100% coal grid, you'd still want batteries for when the coal plants max out or to smooth out the cooldown time for the coal plants.
- eldaisfish 5y ago
  i did read it. It is a mischaracterisation because the two are not comparable as time is ignored. To achieve functional parity with a fuel-powered generator such as a nuclear plant, you would need to guarantee identical operation with an array of wind generators. At the moment, this is only possible over large geographical areas. As for battery capacity, you seem to underestimate how much electrical energy even small cities use. The limiting factor is capacity. FYI, the US consumes around 3,800 terawatt hours of electrical energy annually. Good luck powering even a fraction of that for more than a few seconds with a battery.
  - cogman10 5y ago
    > As for battery capacity, you seem to underestimate how much electrical energy even small cities use. I'm not sure where you get that impression. We are manufacturing around 500 GWh of new batteries yearly right now [1]. To put that in perspective, that's enough capacity for 1 hour of US annual energy consumption per year. 1 hour is a lot of time to bring up new power generation plants in the event of an outage. That production rate has been accelerating with the new demand for EVs. That is likely to double or triple within the next few years. The current largest battery plant weighs in at 1.6GWh, which is more than enough to power a city of 100k for several hours (it isn't currently used for that, it is stabilizing regional power). Like all things, battery power will first be able to handle seconds, then minutes, then hours, and finally days worth of power requirements. For grid stabilization, that's more than enough capacity requirements. And, as I said earlier, batteries are good for any grid, regardless of energy source. It allows a nuclear operator to run the plant harder and it allows plants to ditch fast ramping plants for more economical slow ramp plants. [1] https://energycentral.com/c/ec/world-battery-production https://energycentral.com/c/ec/world-battery-production

cogman10 5y ago

What? This infographic is proving the point that nuclear generates a BUNCH of power and a single plant would require vast amounts of renewables to replace it. Did you actually read it before ranting? > No wind or solar generator can do this and before you say batteries, no battery in existence can power a medium-sized city for more than a few minutes. This is a silly argument. The only real limiting factor on the capacity of a battery, at this point, is manufacturing capacity. That is changing very quickly as more than a few companies are looking at expanding their battery production capabilities. Beyond that, grid batteries are good for any grid configuration. Batteries have rapid response to demand surplus and deficits. They are a grid stabilizing technology. Even if we had a 100% coal grid, you'd still want batteries for when the coal plants max out or to smooth out the cooldown time for the coal plants.

eldaisfish 5y ago
i did read it. It is a mischaracterisation because the two are not comparable as time is ignored. To achieve functional parity with a fuel-powered generator such as a nuclear plant, you would need to guarantee identical operation with an array of wind generators. At the moment, this is only possible over large geographical areas. As for battery capacity, you seem to underestimate how much electrical energy even small cities use. The limiting factor is capacity. FYI, the US consumes around 3,800 terawatt hours of electrical energy annually. Good luck powering even a fraction of that for more than a few seconds with a battery.
- cogman10 5y ago
  > As for battery capacity, you seem to underestimate how much electrical energy even small cities use. I'm not sure where you get that impression. We are manufacturing around 500 GWh of new batteries yearly right now [1]. To put that in perspective, that's enough capacity for 1 hour of US annual energy consumption per year. 1 hour is a lot of time to bring up new power generation plants in the event of an outage. That production rate has been accelerating with the new demand for EVs. That is likely to double or triple within the next few years. The current largest battery plant weighs in at 1.6GWh, which is more than enough to power a city of 100k for several hours (it isn't currently used for that, it is stabilizing regional power). Like all things, battery power will first be able to handle seconds, then minutes, then hours, and finally days worth of power requirements. For grid stabilization, that's more than enough capacity requirements. And, as I said earlier, batteries are good for any grid, regardless of energy source. It allows a nuclear operator to run the plant harder and it allows plants to ditch fast ramping plants for more economical slow ramp plants. [1] https://energycentral.com/c/ec/world-battery-production https://energycentral.com/c/ec/world-battery-production