3 ms·
For basically every big factory it is not easy to stop and startup again. For example for a large metal melt factory it would take a year to shutoff and another
by holoduke 5y ago
For basically every big factory it is not easy to stop and startup again. For example for a large metal melt factory it would take a year to shutoff and another year to startup. For large oil production facilities it takes at least one year to halt operations. That's why they have these huge silos. Thosr factories are build with constant production in mind.
Same thing for container ship logistics. A complex system that can take years to startup. Currently visible everywhere.
- ethbr0 5y agoHaving broadly-deployable (i.e. few geographic limitations), toggle-able, economically-productive ways to burn power that are carbon neutral or negative is the real solution. There's no reason prices should ever be negative... except for a lack of power sinks. If there were intermittent hydrogen production facilities, or direct air capture of carbon + a carbon market that rewarded that, the intermittency accounting quirk would correct itself.
- DennisP 5y agoThose are probably good ideas but they're still not necessarily the cheapest options. They'll have capital costs to pay off over time like anything else, and if they only run half the time then the capital cost is doubled for the amount of output you get.
- dr_orpheus 5y ago> direct air capture of carbon + a carbon market that rewarded that That could be nice. Maybe if the DOE money helped with capital to build a direct air carbon capture system. Then the nuclear plants can sell credits to oil/gas based energy companies similar to how like Tesla sells its credits to other car manufacturers.