3 ms·

> Ironically, we already have plenty of renewable energy in the US, it’s just there, sitting, waiting to be hooked up to the grid and not being used productivel

> Ironically, we already have plenty of renewable energy in the US, it’s just there, sitting, waiting to be hooked up to the grid and not being used productively. The 947 GW is the total proposed capacity for solar projects that are in various planning stages. They have not been built yet, and most of them will never be built -- historically only about 14% of proposed capacity ends up entering service [1]. This isn't to say that it's not important to invest in the grid to handle future needs. But it's not like there's a bunch of renewable energy just sitting there idle. [1] https://emp.lbl.gov/queues https://emp.lbl.gov/queues

highwaylights 2y ago
I know nothing about this topic, but it seems like maybe this comment and the parent don't disagree. If most power generation is blocked by a lack of connectivity to the grid then it would stand to reason that most projects are abandoned or fail as they've no path to entering service (unless I've misunderstood).
- elicksaur 2y ago
  I had the same reaction as the comment you are replying to. I read the first comment quite literally. That there is over 900 GW of power that currently exists but just needs to be “hooked up”. i.e. a solar farm that is built, but through some bureaucracy there’s no line running from it to the grid. With the context of the reply, that is not the case. Most of the cited 900GW isn’t even built yet. This seems like an important distinction when considering the scope of work needing to be done.
beeeeerp 2y ago
Is that 14% different with solar? I’m just bringing this up, because solar is dead simple compared to engineering studies and infrastructure required to build something like a new nuclear plant. I wonder if the simplicity of solar and storage will start to change how power generation is approached.
- PaywallBuster 2y ago
  There's been only 1 build in 2013 and last one before in 1978 according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_the_United_St... so nuclear wouldn't affect those 14%
  - beeeeerp 2y ago
    It was just an example of complexity - I would imagine a new coal plant is still more complex than a solar farm.

highwaylights 2y ago

I know nothing about this topic, but it seems like maybe this comment and the parent don't disagree. If most power generation is blocked by a lack of connectivity to the grid then it would stand to reason that most projects are abandoned or fail as they've no path to entering service (unless I've misunderstood).

elicksaur 2y ago
I had the same reaction as the comment you are replying to. I read the first comment quite literally. That there is over 900 GW of power that currently exists but just needs to be “hooked up”. i.e. a solar farm that is built, but through some bureaucracy there’s no line running from it to the grid. With the context of the reply, that is not the case. Most of the cited 900GW isn’t even built yet. This seems like an important distinction when considering the scope of work needing to be done.

beeeeerp 2y ago

Is that 14% different with solar? I’m just bringing this up, because solar is dead simple compared to engineering studies and infrastructure required to build something like a new nuclear plant. I wonder if the simplicity of solar and storage will start to change how power generation is approached.

PaywallBuster 2y ago
There's been only 1 build in 2013 and last one before in 1978 according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_the_United_St... so nuclear wouldn't affect those 14%
- beeeeerp 2y ago
  It was just an example of complexity - I would imagine a new coal plant is still more complex than a solar farm.