3 ms·
Also worth pointing out that * Newer wind turbines produce power a lot more consistently (being taller). * There's a huge amount of cheap, low hanging fruit w
by pydry 5y ago
Also worth pointing out that
* Newer wind turbines produce power a lot more consistently (being taller).
* There's a huge amount of cheap, low hanging fruit with respect to demand shaping that we've barely scratched the surface of. E.g. aluminium smelters in germany dont particularly care about having a constant source of power they just want cheap. They dial up and down with the spot cost. Smart storage heaters can displace gas heaters. Cars can be programmed to charge when electricity is cheap.
* You dont actually want a source that produces constant power you want supply to match demand.
* Week long lulls in the wind on a contiental level are actually pretty rare (& tend to happen in summer when solar output peaks). Added to which, offshore lulls tend to line up with onshore peaks and vice versa.
* Nuclear power involves taxpayers buying an option out on potential cleanup costs ($800 billion in Japan).
* Non-nuclear renewables get built a lot quicker than nuclear, are not subject to budget/timetable overruns and are likely to continue plunging in price.
- AndrewDucker 5y agoWeek-long lulls are rare - but you do get prolonged periods of lower winds, so you need oversupply to deal with that: https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/weak-winds-worsened-europes-power-crunch-utilities-need-better-storage-2021-12-22/ https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/weak-winds-worse... But absolutely, better despatch, better demand shaping, and better storage would all be awesome. I hope we can get storage cheap and prolific enough to avoid the need for nuclear entirely.