7 ms·

How is paying a lot for energy not the future? It seems to be the trend worldwide.

by EGG_CREAM 2y ago

cooper_ganglia 2y ago
Nuclear fusion has entered the chat.
- toomuchtodo 2y ago
  Solar and batteries is fusion at a distance with almost no containment, embrittlement, or other technology challenges.
  - cryptonector 2y ago
    But with albedo changes and other negative environmental impacts. TAANSTAFL. That said, fusion is a long way off.
- itishappy 2y ago
  What's the cost per MWh on that again?
  - QuadmasterXLII 2y ago
    Last I checked, the going rate is roughly 3.5 Billion for 3 MJ. Cost coming down quickly though! Only a couple dozen orders of magnitude to go and it’ll blow solar out of the water!
  - pfdietz 2y ago
    Well, the cost estimate for ARC was $29/W(e,net) for the capital cost of the reactor, or about 2x the cost of Vogtle-3/4 (for entire power plants).
- more_corn 2y ago
  We’re so sorry, nuclear fusion is experiencing high latency and packet loss. Please try again in $(10 RANDOM %100) years.
retrac 2y ago
Most of the cost of energy is the fossil fuels themselves, or taxation to discourage use. The cost of photovoltaic power seems to be governed by a scaling law, that has held for several decades now. [1] It is now cheaper than fossil fuels in sunny regions for electricity generation, without subsidy or other incentive. Even cautious estimates of further improvement, produce rather pleasing scenarios a few decades out. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/solar-pv-prices https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/solar-pv-prices
- pfdietz 2y ago
  > cheaper than fossil fuels One needs to specify if this means "cheaper than a new construction fossil fuel plant" or "cheaper than operating an existing fossil fuel plant". Whether a CO2 tax is involved should also be specified. Things will really take off when existing plants can no longer compete (particularly in places like the US where overall demand is growing slowly, if at all). Of course, this will depress the price of the fuel (natural gas is in the doldrums in the US) which will delay things.
  - jncfhnb 2y ago
    The LCOE of solar is lower than the LCOE of fossil fuels. That includes setup costs. But it also of course wins without it for both sources because you don’t need to buy the fuel. It’s not yet there if you’re also looking at the broader cycle that includes operating battery storage. The LCOE of battery and hydrogen fuel tech then depends on the price of the energy. So it’s very difficult to define. But it is getting there.
    - pfdietz 2y ago
      The important point is that if one already has fossil fuel plants, you have to compare the marginal cost of operating those plants vs. the full cost (including capital cost) of replacing them with renewables (CO2 costs included if any). Otherwise, they'll just keep operating the fossil fuel plants. Eventually the fossil fuel plants will age out and be replaced in an apples-to-apples comparison, but that could take decades.
exoverito 2y ago
Current nuclear fission reactors can safely and reliably supply all our electricity needs. France rapidly built out their nuclear fleet in response to the 1973 oil crisis, achieving more than 70% of their electricity generation within 20 years. If the political will is there, it can be done. The problem is that Western elites are corrupt and incompetent. They foolishly outsourced their manufacturing to a rival nation, which is now the rising superpower. Germany shut down its nuclear reactors and spent hundreds of billions on solar, while their manufacturing sector implodes from high electricity prices. Corporate elites are increasingly extractive as exemplified by rising wealth gap, housing / healthcare / education costs, enshittification of internet platforms, etc. Any narrative which justifies price increases is gleefully propagated by the media hegemons. Climate change is used to markup prices on everything so consumers can feel self-righteous paying through the nose. Yet none of this will make a difference. China, India, and Africa will continue burning the cheapest fuels available to support their development.

How is paying a lot for energy not the future? It seems to be the trend worldwide.

cooper_ganglia 2y ago

Nuclear fusion has entered the chat.

toomuchtodo 2y ago
Solar and batteries is fusion at a distance with almost no containment, embrittlement, or other technology challenges.
- cryptonector 2y ago
  But with albedo changes and other negative environmental impacts. TAANSTAFL. That said, fusion is a long way off.
itishappy 2y ago
What's the cost per MWh on that again?
- QuadmasterXLII 2y ago
  Last I checked, the going rate is roughly 3.5 Billion for 3 MJ. Cost coming down quickly though! Only a couple dozen orders of magnitude to go and it’ll blow solar out of the water!
- pfdietz 2y ago
  Well, the cost estimate for ARC was $29/W(e,net) for the capital cost of the reactor, or about 2x the cost of Vogtle-3/4 (for entire power plants).
more_corn 2y ago
We’re so sorry, nuclear fusion is experiencing high latency and packet loss. Please try again in $(10 RANDOM %100) years.

retrac 2y ago

Most of the cost of energy is the fossil fuels themselves, or taxation to discourage use. The cost of photovoltaic power seems to be governed by a scaling law, that has held for several decades now. [1] It is now cheaper than fossil fuels in sunny regions for electricity generation, without subsidy or other incentive. Even cautious estimates of further improvement, produce rather pleasing scenarios a few decades out. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/solar-pv-prices https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/solar-pv-prices

pfdietz 2y ago
> cheaper than fossil fuels One needs to specify if this means "cheaper than a new construction fossil fuel plant" or "cheaper than operating an existing fossil fuel plant". Whether a CO2 tax is involved should also be specified. Things will really take off when existing plants can no longer compete (particularly in places like the US where overall demand is growing slowly, if at all). Of course, this will depress the price of the fuel (natural gas is in the doldrums in the US) which will delay things.
- jncfhnb 2y ago
  The LCOE of solar is lower than the LCOE of fossil fuels. That includes setup costs. But it also of course wins without it for both sources because you don’t need to buy the fuel. It’s not yet there if you’re also looking at the broader cycle that includes operating battery storage. The LCOE of battery and hydrogen fuel tech then depends on the price of the energy. So it’s very difficult to define. But it is getting there.
  - pfdietz 2y ago
    The important point is that if one already has fossil fuel plants, you have to compare the marginal cost of operating those plants vs. the full cost (including capital cost) of replacing them with renewables (CO2 costs included if any). Otherwise, they'll just keep operating the fossil fuel plants. Eventually the fossil fuel plants will age out and be replaced in an apples-to-apples comparison, but that could take decades.

exoverito 2y ago

Current nuclear fission reactors can safely and reliably supply all our electricity needs. France rapidly built out their nuclear fleet in response to the 1973 oil crisis, achieving more than 70% of their electricity generation within 20 years. If the political will is there, it can be done. The problem is that Western elites are corrupt and incompetent. They foolishly outsourced their manufacturing to a rival nation, which is now the rising superpower. Germany shut down its nuclear reactors and spent hundreds of billions on solar, while their manufacturing sector implodes from high electricity prices. Corporate elites are increasingly extractive as exemplified by rising wealth gap, housing / healthcare / education costs, enshittification of internet platforms, etc. Any narrative which justifies price increases is gleefully propagated by the media hegemons. Climate change is used to markup prices on everything so consumers can feel self-righteous paying through the nose. Yet none of this will make a difference. China, India, and Africa will continue burning the cheapest fuels available to support their development.