5 ms·
> Seems to me the people saying solar and battery only future do not live in areas that can be cloudy for multiple weeks. Or we've researched it and understand
by jasonwatkinspdx 3y ago
> Seems to me the people saying solar and battery only future do not live in areas that can be cloudy for multiple weeks.
Or we've researched it and understand the basics of solar technology.
In sunny California solar has a capacity factor of around 25%. In Germany, which is prone to many cloudy days this drops to around 10%. So yes cloudy days have an impact but do not entirely eliminate solar from contention and certainly don't require enough battery capacity to last all winter.
In terms of capital costs solar is around $1 per watt while nuclear is around $10. Combined cycle gas plants are roughly the same as solar. It takes a bit more than a year to build a solar farm, while a new nuclear plant you're looking at a decade. ROI on solar is on the scale of 1 to 2 years. Nuclear will be shockingly lucky to have even started construction in that period.
When we look at the levelized, unsubsidized cost of energy (https://www.lazard.com/media/2ozoovyg/lazards-lcoeplus-april-2023.pdf https://www.lazard.com/media/2ozoovyg/lazards-lcoeplus-april...) we get a range of $24 to $96 per MWh for utility scale solar, while nuclear is $141 to $221 and combined cycle gas plants at $39 to $101.
And the trend lines strongly favor solar + storage.
Is it any wonder investors are reluctant to fund nuclear projects? For the same amount financed I can build 10x the capacity, have half the marginal cost of production, and see nothing but upside in 2 years.
Places like Singapore that lack land suitable for utility scale solar will need to look to other solutions including nuclear. For the rest of us the decision is not difficult.
Seems to me you are unaware of basic facts of the matter while you make naive criticisms of solar investment due to a personal affinity for nuclear technology.
- wolverine876 3y agoI think you might want to fix that link address. :)
- jasonwatkinspdx 3y agoThanks. The way pdf downloads changed in recent versions of Chrome keeps tripping me up. So annoying.
- Gare 3y agoYou both raise good points. Yes solar is getting cheaper but economical and environmentally friendly long term storage (order of several days or even a month worth of energy for a hundred million people) is far from a solved problem. > In sunny California solar has as capacity factor of around 25%. In Germany, which is prone to many cloudy days this drops to around 10%. So yes cloudy days have an impact but do not entirely eliminate solar from contention and certainly don't require enough battery capacity to last all winter. In Croatia yearly capacity factor is around 15%, but the problem is it varies wildly throughout the year. In summer we get up to 300 hours of sunlight per month, in winter less than 50. So yes, on paper the capacity might be enough, but one needs to have the ability to store the massive amount of energy inter-seasonally.
- loeg 3y ago> In summer we get up to 300 hours of sunlight per month, in winter less than 50. So yes, on paper the capacity might be enough, but one needs to have the ability to store the massive amount of energy inter-seasonally. Or overbuild by a factor of 6x or whatever relative to summer loads, which is probably less expensive than long term battery storage.
- Gare 3y agoThere can still be periods of several weeks with very little sunlight. And energy demands will be massive if we switch all heating to heat pumps instead of natural gas which we mostly now use. What actually helps us during winter is hydro and wind power. And Krško nuclear power plant.
- loeg 3y agoYeah, that factor may be significantly higher than 6x depending on locale.
- cm2187 3y agoCost of solar in isolation is meaningless. You need to factor in the cost of dealing with its intermittency, i.e. no power at night, variable power during daylight.
- loeg 3y agoYeah, "1W" of solar generation and 1W of nuclear generation are not interchangeable. There is a subtle sleight of hand in GP's argument.
- jasonwatkinspdx 3y agoThat is what capacity factor captures.
- cm2187 3y agoNo it doesn't. Whether Solar has a 10% or 25% average load doesn't matter, you need to build something else to deal with needing power at night.
- jasonwatkinspdx 3y agoThat is what capacity factor captures.
- loeg 3y agoIt really doesn't. What we care about to avoid blackouts is something like the minimum output, rather than the average.
- concordDance 3y agoThis is a good quality post except for the dig in the last paragraph. I would, however, be curious if you can run the numbers for the UK or Germany. How much solar and battery would you need to be able to have no brownouts during winter? Trying some very rough numbers myself: Currently Germany seems to use around 3.3 trillion kwh[1] of energy per year. Likely around 300 billion kwh for December. Having a look, the solar irradiance in the sunnier parts of Germany in December seems to be around 20-30 kwh/m^2.[2] Cheap PV solar is generally around 30% efficient and 1.5m^2 costs around £91 retail[3]. So the order of magnitude solar cost needed for Germany in December to not need more than a week's storage is probably around €2 trillion. Amortised over 20 years that's €200 billion per year... This doesnt take into account many things like installation and maintenance and the reduced prices from not buying retail, but it still seems pretty doable, though noticeably higher than current spend of around €100 billion/year. (Which is also roughly what you'd get with French style nuclear) [1] https://ourworldindata.org/energy/country/germany https://ourworldindata.org/energy/country/germany [2] https://www.dwd.de/EN/ourservices/solarenergy/maps_globalradiation_sum_new.html https://www.dwd.de/EN/ourservices/solarenergy/maps_globalrad... [3] https://shop4electrical.co.uk/panels/9905-ja-solar-jam54s30-410-mr-photovoltaic-solar-panel-half-cell-410w https://shop4electrical.co.uk/panels/9905-ja-solar-jam54s30-...