4 ms·

"But if we are actually honest, most of those are not deployed. Most grid batteries deployed today are still Li-Ion" Because the price of lithium was low enoug

"But if we are actually honest, most of those are not deployed. Most grid batteries deployed today are still Li-Ion" Because the price of lithium was low enough, to not bother. Now that has changed, so they will become broadly avaiable very soon. And it is not like there is any technological brakethrough required. You can build and order them today. It is more about adopting production processes to it, to make them cheaper than lithium based batteries. But I heard the argument too often, that batteries are not a solution, because of rare earth elements, which is why I brought it up. "Yes, but all those things come at a cost. " And yes, they do. The price for renewables is a massive investment in the grid. And the price for nuclear is safety. As far as I know, no private insurance company is willing to take that risk, which is why the states have to step in. The worst thing that can happen with batteries is a fire (and most saltwater based batteries are actually quite fire proof) The worst thing that can happen with a swimming nuclear plant is widespread contamination for decades. It is still advised against eating too many mushrooms or boar meat in my area (central europe), because of one incident 35 years ago, happening 1000 km away.

panick21_ 5y ago
> it is not like there is any technological brakethrough required. Just like there isn't in advanced nuclear and yet you 100% believe that will happen but reject that the same can happen in nuclear. Funny how that works. Both relay on a advanced chemical process that have to be correctly controlled. The advantage is that a few 1000 nuclear plants can power the whole world, when we are talking about Form Energy style batteries we literally need 1000000s large locations to provide the kind of stability need for a global grid that only gets powered by solar/wind. What happens when a volcano darkness the sun for a few weeks? Everything including transportation will be standing still. You better have a few weeks of backup energy. Storing the global need for 1 weeks worth of energy alone is almost unimaginable task. Specially once all flight transportation and industrial heat 100% depend on availability of electricity. > It is still advised against eating too many mushrooms or boar meat in my area (central europe), because of one incident 35 years ago, happening 1000 km away. Yes and that is total nonsense pushed by vastly overzealous over-reaction and fear mongering driven by absurd low tolerance level having been written into law to make nuclear almost impossibly expensive. I'm central European and I have eat a lot of boar meat and I'm fine. The actual reality is far more people have been killed by oil, gas and coal then nuclear, its not even close. The single largest nuclear accident in the history of the earth lead to the premature death of about 1500 people based on the best most authoritative report. And of course that design has literally nothing to do with the designs I'm advocating. Its like saying 'don't ever get into a plain, somebody once build a zeppelin and wanted to fly it by making a hole in the hull and light they hydrogen stream out on fire'. Go and actually study advanced modern nuclear reactors and tell me how they can lead to mass death. I would argue to come up with a viable case for major damage you would basically need terrorist working together with 2 massive natural disasters and even then its likely gone kill less people then a gas pipeline explosion. Its nothing but fear mongering about technology people don't understand. Molten Salt reactor can not even produce a reaction like happen at Fukushima let alone the what happened Chernobyl.

panick21_ 5y ago

> it is not like there is any technological brakethrough required. Just like there isn't in advanced nuclear and yet you 100% believe that will happen but reject that the same can happen in nuclear. Funny how that works. Both relay on a advanced chemical process that have to be correctly controlled. The advantage is that a few 1000 nuclear plants can power the whole world, when we are talking about Form Energy style batteries we literally need 1000000s large locations to provide the kind of stability need for a global grid that only gets powered by solar/wind. What happens when a volcano darkness the sun for a few weeks? Everything including transportation will be standing still. You better have a few weeks of backup energy. Storing the global need for 1 weeks worth of energy alone is almost unimaginable task. Specially once all flight transportation and industrial heat 100% depend on availability of electricity. > It is still advised against eating too many mushrooms or boar meat in my area (central europe), because of one incident 35 years ago, happening 1000 km away. Yes and that is total nonsense pushed by vastly overzealous over-reaction and fear mongering driven by absurd low tolerance level having been written into law to make nuclear almost impossibly expensive. I'm central European and I have eat a lot of boar meat and I'm fine. The actual reality is far more people have been killed by oil, gas and coal then nuclear, its not even close. The single largest nuclear accident in the history of the earth lead to the premature death of about 1500 people based on the best most authoritative report. And of course that design has literally nothing to do with the designs I'm advocating. Its like saying 'don't ever get into a plain, somebody once build a zeppelin and wanted to fly it by making a hole in the hull and light they hydrogen stream out on fire'. Go and actually study advanced modern nuclear reactors and tell me how they can lead to mass death. I would argue to come up with a viable case for major damage you would basically need terrorist working together with 2 massive natural disasters and even then its likely gone kill less people then a gas pipeline explosion. Its nothing but fear mongering about technology people don't understand. Molten Salt reactor can not even produce a reaction like happen at Fukushima let alone the what happened Chernobyl.