3 ms·

But why not just use nuclear, which produces power 24/7 with no need for storage?

• ben_w 4y ago
  • Cost (as much as the most expensive serious storage systems) • Domestic politics (NIMBYing for both reactors and waste, and you don't get around that just by telling people it's fine) • International politics (extra costs from proving nobody is using them for proliferation) • Build time (too slow compared to renewables) • Depending on your particular perspective, you may also care that the fuel itself is in limited supply (given the assumption that at some point even the currently-poor will want energy-hogging lifestyles and that nuclear reserves, even with breeders are 2500 ZJ compared to 65 ZJ of fossil fuels, then if you give everyone a Qatar per capita use that runs out in only about 300 years).