8 ms·
> It's still horribly expensive and slow to build. Many of those delays are political rather than technical. On top of that, imagine if instead of deriding, d
by illiarian 3y ago
> It's still horribly expensive and slow to build.
Many of those delays are political rather than technical.
On top of that, imagine if instead of deriding, denigrating and spreading FUD about nuclear energy for the past 20-30 years we would instead invest in it and improve it.
> the "black swan" disaster,
Literally yesterday there was a black swan for renewables in Germany. They shut down the last reactors and... https://twitter.com/energybants/status/1647799729734971396 https://twitter.com/energybants/status/1647799729734971396
--- start quote ---
Germany's 66.5 GW of installed wind is only producing as much as the 3 reactors that turned off last night used to produce.
400% expansion of wind would only provide half present need
--- end quote ---
But of course no renewables proponent will ever mention this as a black swan event. Because "sometime 40 years from now, maybe, we will have overbuilt all the renewables and energy storage we need"
- ben_w 3y ago> Many of those delays are political rather than technical. You're not wrong, but that also applies to, for example, an international collaboration to build a global HVDC power grid that can shift enough power from antipodes that we could do a pure PV electricity supply without any storage. Would only take, like, a decade of global metal production, making it faster than that specific reactor. But hey, politics. > But of course no renewables proponent will ever mention this as a black swan event. That's a misuse of the term, black swans are the unknown-unknowns, not predictable bad things. Also, at current rates, more like 10 years. Electric cars use so many batteries that having the capability to make all-electric road transport necessarily also makes grid storage trivial.