4 ms·

Only one model of US reactor has ever gone down in price after repeated builds (and then not by much), South Korea's 'cheap' reactors are suddenly $10/W net whe

Only one model of US reactor has ever gone down in price after repeated builds (and then not by much), South Korea's 'cheap' reactors are suddenly $10/W net when they built one somewhere else and couldn't get creative with the accounting. And the Messmer plan reactors turned out just great (in addition to going up in price with each reactor and having many hidden costs that make them not comparable to a privately funded project). > This is where wind and solar really struggle: they're great at reducing fossil fuel use by ~40% by shutting down gas plants when wind and sun are available I love how this number that renewables can't possibly go beyond keeps going up every month but is said with the same level of ridiculous overconfidence every time (you've got to update it to 60% now for NE Brazil, South Australia and a few other generation grids, and much of Europe has also crossed your 40% threshold too). Any realistic analysis puts the limit in the mid 70% range with no storage or overprovision and well above the threshold where biogas and existing hydro can cover the rest once you add diurnal storage and 3 day dispatchable loads like EV charging and electrolysis.

Manuel_D 4y ago
> You've got to update it to 60% now for NE Brazil, South Australia and a few other generation grids Most of that is hydroelectricity, not wind and solar. Why stop at 60%? Norway produces 100% (or very close to it) of its electricity from hydro. Of course, the answer is that geographically dependent energy sources aren't very useful outside places that have the right geography. Most places with hydroelectric potential are already making use of it. The question is, how do we decarbonize the rest of the grid?
- moloch-hai 4y ago
  You already know the answer to that, as it has been explained to you dozens of times. Once again: renewables+storage, backed by combined-cycle turbines. They will powered by NG until synthetic fuel becomes plentiful. Right now, most storage is at hydroelectric plants built in past decades, with small amounts of battery. In the future, it will still be small amounts of battery, along with plenty of other storage, much of it underground hydrogen and hilltop hydro. There is no hint of any shortage of hills, most places. Flat places will use other methods.
  - Manuel_D 4y ago
    Yes it's been explained repeatedly - but almost always in vague terms referring to "storage" but carefully avoiding any nuanced discussion of what form of storage. When they do mention storage, they mention infeasible forms of storage. I'm happy to explain the shortcomings of the ones you listed: "Small amounts of battery" are still amounts that would take centuries to provision. Again, I don't think people realize that 1 day's worth of storage is well over a hundred times annual battery production. Hydroelectric storage requires more than just a hill. It requires a reservoir on top of the hill, another reservoir on the base of the hill, and access to a lake or river to fill these reservoirs. This is a much more specific set of geographic features than just "a hill". And lastly, nobody has successfully operated a hydrogen electrolysis storage facility. This is totally unproven technology.
    - moloch-hai 4y ago
      As has been explained to you numerous times, reservoirs are normally constructed, not found, and no lake or river is needed. So, you really do just need a hill with unused top. (Penstocks and turbines are also constructed.) There will be no need for "one day's" worth of batteries, but in any case battery production is ramping up fast, and that will continue as long as demand increases. Numerous storage technologies will be used. It is not clear yet which will be cheapest. Hydrogen might not be among them.
      - Manuel_D 4y ago
        You need a lake to fill the artificial reservoir. Pumping water over long distances is prohibitively expensive. You also need a lower reservoir, otherwise how do you refill the upper reservoir once it's been drained? Its more than just a hill. Numerous storage technologies are proposed. And you're just assuming that one of the proposed solutions will work.
        pfdietz 4y ago
        Pumped hydro projects can be filled with water pumped from wells.
- Schroedingersat 4y ago
  I was specifically citing the wind and solar share delivered to loads on those grids over the last year and you know this, this attempt to derail is hilariously transparent and pathetic. Additionally South Australia has almost zero storage or hydro and is at 69% for the year. Their link to the rest of NEM suffered storm damage throughout the year so there has been very little interconnect, but unlike last time when they relied on imported coal, gas and hydro this has not resulted in anything remotely like a shortage. This also puts the lies about transmission being more precarious with renewables to bed. And why stop at 60 indeed. Feed a little surplus into dispatchable loads like EV charging, district heat storage and electrolysis, and 80-90% is pretty trivial. It's very easy to see this as you can just scale up the current mix in many grids until curtailment hits 30% or so (plus whatever portion can be peak shaved by plugging your car in at work, plus the extra during low generation for new generation including less-correlated offshore wind or vertical solar) and see how much of an obvious lie the 40% claim is, and how incapable of critical thinking someone would have to be to believe they could pass the lie off as anything related to reality.

Manuel_D 4y ago

> You've got to update it to 60% now for NE Brazil, South Australia and a few other generation grids Most of that is hydroelectricity, not wind and solar. Why stop at 60%? Norway produces 100% (or very close to it) of its electricity from hydro. Of course, the answer is that geographically dependent energy sources aren't very useful outside places that have the right geography. Most places with hydroelectric potential are already making use of it. The question is, how do we decarbonize the rest of the grid?

moloch-hai 4y ago
You already know the answer to that, as it has been explained to you dozens of times. Once again: renewables+storage, backed by combined-cycle turbines. They will powered by NG until synthetic fuel becomes plentiful. Right now, most storage is at hydroelectric plants built in past decades, with small amounts of battery. In the future, it will still be small amounts of battery, along with plenty of other storage, much of it underground hydrogen and hilltop hydro. There is no hint of any shortage of hills, most places. Flat places will use other methods.
- Manuel_D 4y ago
  Yes it's been explained repeatedly - but almost always in vague terms referring to "storage" but carefully avoiding any nuanced discussion of what form of storage. When they do mention storage, they mention infeasible forms of storage. I'm happy to explain the shortcomings of the ones you listed: "Small amounts of battery" are still amounts that would take centuries to provision. Again, I don't think people realize that 1 day's worth of storage is well over a hundred times annual battery production. Hydroelectric storage requires more than just a hill. It requires a reservoir on top of the hill, another reservoir on the base of the hill, and access to a lake or river to fill these reservoirs. This is a much more specific set of geographic features than just "a hill". And lastly, nobody has successfully operated a hydrogen electrolysis storage facility. This is totally unproven technology.
  - moloch-hai 4y ago
    As has been explained to you numerous times, reservoirs are normally constructed, not found, and no lake or river is needed. So, you really do just need a hill with unused top. (Penstocks and turbines are also constructed.) There will be no need for "one day's" worth of batteries, but in any case battery production is ramping up fast, and that will continue as long as demand increases. Numerous storage technologies will be used. It is not clear yet which will be cheapest. Hydrogen might not be among them.
    - Manuel_D 4y ago
      You need a lake to fill the artificial reservoir. Pumping water over long distances is prohibitively expensive. You also need a lower reservoir, otherwise how do you refill the upper reservoir once it's been drained? Its more than just a hill. Numerous storage technologies are proposed. And you're just assuming that one of the proposed solutions will work.
      - pfdietz 4y ago
        Pumped hydro projects can be filled with water pumped from wells.
Schroedingersat 4y ago
I was specifically citing the wind and solar share delivered to loads on those grids over the last year and you know this, this attempt to derail is hilariously transparent and pathetic. Additionally South Australia has almost zero storage or hydro and is at 69% for the year. Their link to the rest of NEM suffered storm damage throughout the year so there has been very little interconnect, but unlike last time when they relied on imported coal, gas and hydro this has not resulted in anything remotely like a shortage. This also puts the lies about transmission being more precarious with renewables to bed. And why stop at 60 indeed. Feed a little surplus into dispatchable loads like EV charging, district heat storage and electrolysis, and 80-90% is pretty trivial. It's very easy to see this as you can just scale up the current mix in many grids until curtailment hits 30% or so (plus whatever portion can be peak shaved by plugging your car in at work, plus the extra during low generation for new generation including less-correlated offshore wind or vertical solar) and see how much of an obvious lie the 40% claim is, and how incapable of critical thinking someone would have to be to believe they could pass the lie off as anything related to reality.