2 ms·
My understanding is that one of the big problems is transmission. It reduces the cost competitiveness when you have to factor in running many more high voltage
by mdeeks 4y ago
My understanding is that one of the big problems is transmission. It reduces the cost competitiveness when you have to factor in running many more high voltage transmission lines across the US. You need them to get the power from the desert to city centers that have the bulk of demand. Building transmission lines in the US is apparently very hard because there is a lot of red tape and politics and NIMBY-ism (to be fair they are ugly).
Nuclear can mostly be built near the centers of demand and reduce the need for elaborate new transmission.
- ncmncm 4y agoTransmission is cheap. But there is absolutely no need to site solar in deserts. It can be local, anywhere, coexisting neatly with other land use.
- mdeeks 4y agoThe Real Engineering youtube link in one of the comments above mine in this thread has an example where putting it in the desert yields three times more than putting it on location in Germany. So there is a significant difference in some places. I'd imagine that makes a difference in being cost competitive. Also in the video: A single 700MW line from from morocco to spain cost 150M. Though I suspect thats a more expensive than overhead lines.
- ncmncm 4y agoThe lesson of the RE video was that they cancelled the Sahara solar projects because panels had got so cheap, putting them right there in Germany was better despite efficiency arguments. Efficiency turned out to matter a lot less than other things, as price fell.