6 ms·
Sure, but let's build 150% of total needed capacity as renewables, and burn coal for the 5 days a year we still need to.
by hackerfromthefu 5y ago
Sure, but let's build 150% of total needed capacity as renewables, and burn coal for the 5 days a year we still need to.
- realusername 5y agoYou start to understand the issue of comparing the raw cost of kWh of renewables to stable energy like nuclear, if you have to build N times the capacity, the cost per kWh is just N times more expensive.
- afterburner 5y agoBut unlike nuclear, solar/wind is constantly getting cheaper. Nuclear is, frankly, doing the opposite.
- realusername 5y agoDoesn't matter if you can't build a grid with only those and still need gas or nuclear aside. The real cost of renewable in a functioning grid is probably 5 times higher of what's advertised when including externalities.
- lazide 5y agoWhen you do the 2-3x (minimum) for wind and solar + keep the coal plant around and ready to go at a moments notice, including stockpile fuel and maintain it, it starts getting really expensive really fast.
- ncmncm 5y agoGas plant. Coal is much more expensive than gas, by every measure, and is much less adjustable to immediate requirement. The only reason any coal is still being used is installed base and market and political inertia. Political, because it should already be banned.