4 ms·
The antecedent is that we could completely solve California’s energy and climate change crises by 2042 for $360 billion. A mountainous policy hurdle, but taller
by ipnon 4y ago
The antecedent is that we could completely solve California’s energy and climate change crises by 2042 for $360 billion. A mountainous policy hurdle, but taller peaks have been climbed.
- ZeroGravitas 4y agoThey'd already committed to do better than that back in 2018, 5 years ago and keep accelerating the timescale: In March 2022, CPUC approved a plan to add 18.8 GW solar, 6.7 GW wind, and 14.7 GW batteries by 2032 at 18c/kWh, reaching 73% renewables.[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_California https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_California
- falcolas 4y ago9 nuclear power plants, at ~5 GWh/y apiece (45,000 GWh/y combined) would barely cover the estimated power requirements of the 2035 electric car plans (around 43,000 GWh/y). 45,000 GWh/y is also less than half of the power CA imports. 43,000 GWh/y = 15m cars * .24 KWh/m * 12,000 annual miles .24 KWh/m is for the latest Tesla 3 cars. 5GWh/y is from https://www.americangeosciences.org/critical-issues/faq/how-much-electricity-does-typical-nuclear-power-plant-generate https://www.americangeosciences.org/critical-issues/faq/how-...