3 ms·
> Deploying 5GW of solar and storage, or 3-4GW of wind, is far easier, faster, and cheaper than trying to build a new reactor, Source? The largest grid scale b
by dahfizz 4y ago
> Deploying 5GW of solar and storage, or 3-4GW of wind, is far easier, faster, and cheaper than trying to build a new reactor,
Source? The largest grid scale batteries to date don't come close to the numbers you are talking about. The largest operational deployment gives a paltry 0.4 GW and can only sustain that for a few hours[1].
People love to hand wave away storage, but it is a monumental and unsolved problem.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_storage_power_station https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_storage_power_statio...
- ncmncm 4y agoWe already know that only a very small fraction of storage will ever be batteries, initially enough for load-leveling and eventually for evening peaking. We also know that money put into storage before enough renewables have been built out to displace fossil generation and charge the storage is money wasted that could have been spent building out generation capacity. When storage becomes a good use of money, it will be much, much cheaper to build. Pointing to not much storage built out yet is a shuck.
- 7952 4y agoBattery storage projects have tended to be smaller and in the UK average around 20MW. They have followed the pattern of distributed energy rather than big projects connecting at 400kV. In the UK there is over 20GW in the pipeline.