6 ms·

Instead of investing in nuclear we wasted decades investing in solar and wind. Well, it wasn't a waste for the companies and countries who profited and their l

by 99_00 3y ago

Instead of investing in nuclear we wasted decades investing in solar and wind. Well, it wasn't a waste for the companies and countries who profited and their lobbyists.

mordae 3y ago
Extreme heat events tend to go hand in hand with great solar yields. So actually building some solar power plants would be a sensible thing to do. But that would probably need some involvement from public sector and US public sector has been systematically dismantled since Reagan at least. I am not saying it's not happening elsewhere, but I sure am glad that it's not going to be me and my family who's gonna eventually reclaim the public sector at the cost of watering the democracy tree. Sorry for the irony. Have a nice day from EU.
- quickthrower2 3y ago
  How does that work out? If it is a clear sunny day, how does more heat cause more electricity production in a given panel. Or does warming give us more cloudfree days?
  - shagie 3y ago
    https://www.bostonsolar.us/solar-blog-resource-center/blog/how-do-temperature-and-shade-affect-solar-panel-efficiency/ https://www.bostonsolar.us/solar-blog-resource-center/blog/h... > Many of our customers in Massachusetts want to know exactly how changes in heat can affect solar panel performance. Solar panels are generally tested at about 77°F and are rated to perform at peak efficiency between 59°F and 95°F. However, solar panels may get as hot as 149°F during the summer. When the surface temperature of your solar panels gets this high, solar panel efficiency can decline somewhat. > ... > For example, the temperature coefficient of LG NeON® 2 solar panels is -0.38% per one degree Celsius. This means that for every one degree Celsius above 25°C, the maximum efficiency of an LG NeON® 2 solar panel will decrease by 0.38%. Conversely, for every one degree Celsius below 25°C, the maximum efficiency of that solar panel will increase by 0.38%. (Yes — cooler, sunny weather is best for your solar panels and can help offset any decreased efficiency in the summer.) --- https://greentumble.com/effect-of-temperature-on-solar-panel-efficiency https://greentumble.com/effect-of-temperature-on-solar-panel... > According to the manufacture standards, 25 °C or 77 °F temperature indicates the peak of the optimum temperature range of photovoltaic solar panels. It is when solar photovoltaic cells are able to absorb sunlight with maximum efficiency and when we can expect them to perform the best. > ... > For example, if your solar panels have a coefficient of minus 0.4 percent, their output on hot days will drop nearly twice that much compared to the output of a panel with a coefficient of only minus 0.2 percent per one degree Celsius. > White or light-colored roofing also helps to lower the temperature around your panels, since these colors reflect sunlight more and do not get heated up like dark roofing. > While above mentioned points involve passive cooling methods, some people opt even for active cooling systems. --- Extreme heat days, while they tend to be sunny often have poorer performance for solar while the demand for power (AC) goes up.
- melling 3y ago
  “So actually…” Just say we were wrong. “My bad” We completely missed our 1.5 goal and the batteries are still coming.
- rossdavidh 3y ago
  Just FYI, Texas has been adding solar at a fast (and exponentially increasing) rate in the last decade, while phasing out coal-fired plants.
melling 3y ago
We’ll hit 1.5C within a decade. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-world-will-likely-miss-1-5-degrees-c-why-isnt-anyone-saying-so/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-world-will-li...
jimbob45 3y ago
What’s wrong with solar and wind?
- ibejoeb 3y ago
  Generally, at it is now, they're unreliable and unpredictable, and we lack adequate storage capabilities to mitigate those things. It's not unreasonable to look to shifting to those technologies, but the course were on now of shutting down controllable power plants first is hard to characterize as anything but irresponsible.
- HyperSane 3y ago
  You can't have it as 100% of the supply because it is too variable.
- shagie 3y ago
  Fundamentally? Nothing. They are good and should be used whenever and wherever possible. There is a number to consider when doing this planning - it's called the capacity factor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_factor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_factor > The net capacity factor is the unitless ratio of actual electrical energy output over a given period of time to the theoretical maximum electrical energy output over that period. In the US for 2018 data Nuclear: 92.6% Conv. Hydro: 42.8% Wind: 37.4% Solar PV: 26.1% Solar CSP: 23.6% Landfill Gas: 73.3% Other biomass: 49.3% Geothermal: 77.3% Coal: 54.0% Natural Gas CC: 57.6% Natural Gas CT: 11.8% Natural Gas ST: 13.7% Oil ST: 13.9% Oil CT: 2.5% Hydro has a bit of variability that can get it better than nuclear if it has a retention dam rather than run of the river. Hydro may also be impacted by other regulations regarding excessive aeration of the water and fish spawning times (https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/06/massive-snowmelt-pits-wind-turbines-against-water-power/240373/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/06/massi... https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/wind-power-and-water-power-collide-in-northwest/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/wind-power-and-wat... ) This also depends on the month of the year (hydro provides more in the spring than in the fall, solar provides more in the summer than in the winter). The installed capacity of solar provides only a fraction of what it theoretically could in the winter when the days are shorter and the sun is lower in the sky.
mschuster91 3y ago
Nuclear plants take 15-20 years to build in practice, cost double, triple or more of initial estimates just for construction, more billions for teardown, and even more for storing all the waste. On top of that they're at real risk for natural disasters (of which no US state is secure - either it's hurricanes or earthquakes) and accidents due to mismanagement and corner-cutting. And no one wants to live near one either, which means a shitton more cost in construction because you have to build them in the desert, or the project gets boggled down for years by NIMBYs. In contrast, you can build a solar or wind plant in less than a year. And the profits for these end up in the local community where they stand instead of investment funds owning the nuclear plant operators.
- HyperSane 3y ago
  Nuclear has the distinct advantage of working at night and is far more consistent than wind.
  - hk1337 3y ago
    Nuclear power is a base energy source. It’s not as easy to start and stop power generation with nuclear. You can use nuclear to help cover your base usage but then you have to rely on sources like solar, wind, natural gas, etc, to help in the high demand.
    - HyperSane 3y ago
      Have you noticed that some extreme proponents of wind and solar claim that base load is a myth?
chaxor 3y ago
I'm not sure why these are presented as mutually exclusive
- 99_00 3y ago
  Ask the people who are building solar and wind capacity while shutting down nuclear plants.

by 99_00 3y ago

Instead of investing in nuclear we wasted decades investing in solar and wind. Well, it wasn't a waste for the companies and countries who profited and their lobbyists.

mordae 3y ago

Extreme heat events tend to go hand in hand with great solar yields. So actually building some solar power plants would be a sensible thing to do. But that would probably need some involvement from public sector and US public sector has been systematically dismantled since Reagan at least. I am not saying it's not happening elsewhere, but I sure am glad that it's not going to be me and my family who's gonna eventually reclaim the public sector at the cost of watering the democracy tree. Sorry for the irony. Have a nice day from EU.

quickthrower2 3y ago
How does that work out? If it is a clear sunny day, how does more heat cause more electricity production in a given panel. Or does warming give us more cloudfree days?
- shagie 3y ago
  https://www.bostonsolar.us/solar-blog-resource-center/blog/how-do-temperature-and-shade-affect-solar-panel-efficiency/ https://www.bostonsolar.us/solar-blog-resource-center/blog/h... > Many of our customers in Massachusetts want to know exactly how changes in heat can affect solar panel performance. Solar panels are generally tested at about 77°F and are rated to perform at peak efficiency between 59°F and 95°F. However, solar panels may get as hot as 149°F during the summer. When the surface temperature of your solar panels gets this high, solar panel efficiency can decline somewhat. > ... > For example, the temperature coefficient of LG NeON® 2 solar panels is -0.38% per one degree Celsius. This means that for every one degree Celsius above 25°C, the maximum efficiency of an LG NeON® 2 solar panel will decrease by 0.38%. Conversely, for every one degree Celsius below 25°C, the maximum efficiency of that solar panel will increase by 0.38%. (Yes — cooler, sunny weather is best for your solar panels and can help offset any decreased efficiency in the summer.) --- https://greentumble.com/effect-of-temperature-on-solar-panel-efficiency https://greentumble.com/effect-of-temperature-on-solar-panel... > According to the manufacture standards, 25 °C or 77 °F temperature indicates the peak of the optimum temperature range of photovoltaic solar panels. It is when solar photovoltaic cells are able to absorb sunlight with maximum efficiency and when we can expect them to perform the best. > ... > For example, if your solar panels have a coefficient of minus 0.4 percent, their output on hot days will drop nearly twice that much compared to the output of a panel with a coefficient of only minus 0.2 percent per one degree Celsius. > White or light-colored roofing also helps to lower the temperature around your panels, since these colors reflect sunlight more and do not get heated up like dark roofing. > While above mentioned points involve passive cooling methods, some people opt even for active cooling systems. --- Extreme heat days, while they tend to be sunny often have poorer performance for solar while the demand for power (AC) goes up.
melling 3y ago
“So actually…” Just say we were wrong. “My bad” We completely missed our 1.5 goal and the batteries are still coming.
rossdavidh 3y ago
Just FYI, Texas has been adding solar at a fast (and exponentially increasing) rate in the last decade, while phasing out coal-fired plants.

melling 3y ago

We’ll hit 1.5C within a decade. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-world-will-likely-miss-1-5-degrees-c-why-isnt-anyone-saying-so/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-world-will-li...

jimbob45 3y ago

What’s wrong with solar and wind?

ibejoeb 3y ago
Generally, at it is now, they're unreliable and unpredictable, and we lack adequate storage capabilities to mitigate those things. It's not unreasonable to look to shifting to those technologies, but the course were on now of shutting down controllable power plants first is hard to characterize as anything but irresponsible.
HyperSane 3y ago
You can't have it as 100% of the supply because it is too variable.
shagie 3y ago
Fundamentally? Nothing. They are good and should be used whenever and wherever possible. There is a number to consider when doing this planning - it's called the capacity factor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_factor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_factor > The net capacity factor is the unitless ratio of actual electrical energy output over a given period of time to the theoretical maximum electrical energy output over that period. In the US for 2018 data Nuclear: 92.6% Conv. Hydro: 42.8% Wind: 37.4% Solar PV: 26.1% Solar CSP: 23.6% Landfill Gas: 73.3% Other biomass: 49.3% Geothermal: 77.3% Coal: 54.0% Natural Gas CC: 57.6% Natural Gas CT: 11.8% Natural Gas ST: 13.7% Oil ST: 13.9% Oil CT: 2.5% Hydro has a bit of variability that can get it better than nuclear if it has a retention dam rather than run of the river. Hydro may also be impacted by other regulations regarding excessive aeration of the water and fish spawning times (https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/06/massive-snowmelt-pits-wind-turbines-against-water-power/240373/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/06/massi... https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/wind-power-and-water-power-collide-in-northwest/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/wind-power-and-wat... ) This also depends on the month of the year (hydro provides more in the spring than in the fall, solar provides more in the summer than in the winter). The installed capacity of solar provides only a fraction of what it theoretically could in the winter when the days are shorter and the sun is lower in the sky.

mschuster91 3y ago

Nuclear plants take 15-20 years to build in practice, cost double, triple or more of initial estimates just for construction, more billions for teardown, and even more for storing all the waste. On top of that they're at real risk for natural disasters (of which no US state is secure - either it's hurricanes or earthquakes) and accidents due to mismanagement and corner-cutting. And no one wants to live near one either, which means a shitton more cost in construction because you have to build them in the desert, or the project gets boggled down for years by NIMBYs. In contrast, you can build a solar or wind plant in less than a year. And the profits for these end up in the local community where they stand instead of investment funds owning the nuclear plant operators.

HyperSane 3y ago
Nuclear has the distinct advantage of working at night and is far more consistent than wind.
- hk1337 3y ago
  Nuclear power is a base energy source. It’s not as easy to start and stop power generation with nuclear. You can use nuclear to help cover your base usage but then you have to rely on sources like solar, wind, natural gas, etc, to help in the high demand.
  - HyperSane 3y ago
    Have you noticed that some extreme proponents of wind and solar claim that base load is a myth?

chaxor 3y ago

I'm not sure why these are presented as mutually exclusive

99_00 3y ago
Ask the people who are building solar and wind capacity while shutting down nuclear plants.