2 ms·
> You can build several renewable sources during that time with double the output. So why hasn't anyone done it? It takes years to build a solar plant, too, a
by Turing_Machine 3y ago
> You can build several renewable sources during that time with double the output.
So why hasn't anyone done it?
It takes years to build a solar plant, too, and there aren't very many (if any) solar plants with "double the output".
- Turing_Machine 3y agoI checked. The largest PV power station in full operation is the Bhadla Solar Park in India. Its maximum output is 2.2 GW. There are at least 70 nuclear facilities that turn out 2.2 GW or more. Some turn out above 7 GW, and they run almost all the time, rather than being offline half the day on average (which makes the solar plant really only equivalent to a a 1.1 GW plant at most).
- petsfed 3y agoIn the context of the original article, its because regulatory capture of the entire energy industry in e.g. Wyoming (the "Cowboy State" of the Cowboy State Daily) set renewables back a decade or more. I'm 100% certain that nuclear would meet similar resistance, even if the uranium necessary would be mined in Wyoming. The coal and gas industry lobbied hard for a higher per/MW excise tax on renewable energy in Wyoming, which largely prevented more widespread wind power development in the late '00s. Its only now that renewables have remained dominant over coal and gas that you're seeing more wind projects, and even then, its a constant battle to keep the state legislature from taxing those into cancellation.