4 ms·

Again: "cannot replace"! Coal is providing a very different form of energy, used with very different applications. Directly comparing the numbers, is comparing

Again: "cannot replace"! Coal is providing a very different form of energy, used with very different applications. Directly comparing the numbers, is comparing apples and bananas. Your case has no foundation.

ptero 2y ago
> Coal is providing a very different form of energy, used with very different applications. What are those? Nuclear and renewables uses are indeed very different. Nuclear and coal for base load -- not so much. At least this is what I heard for decades. I would be interested to read a refutation.
- PurpleRamen 2y ago
  Base load is more of a fairy tail. For the applications I'm talking about, I explained them in a sibling comment.
  - throw0101c 2y ago
    > Base load is more of a fairy tail. So the >9 GW of power provided 24/7 by nuclear on the "Supply" tab is a figment of imagination? * https://ieso.ca/power-data https://ieso.ca/power-data
    - PurpleRamen 2y ago
      The importance of the base load is a fairy tale, not the numbers. Nuclear plants idling are a burden for the grid. Without them, you can manage it far more flexible, it seems.
throw0101c 2y ago
> Coal is providing a very different form of energy, used with very different applications. As an EE, I do not understand "different form of energy". How are the electrons and EM fields different between nuclear and coal generation? As someone who lives in Ontario, Canada, we got rid of all of our coal in 2014 and have lots of nuclear: * https://www.ontario.ca/page/end-coal https://www.ontario.ca/page/end-coal
- PurpleRamen 2y ago
  Really? You've never learned about chemical processes, heat, conversions of energy? Isn't this something you would learn in school? Well, ok, then here is an ELI5: If you have a stove, running with coal, then you can't use electricity to fuel it. You need to buy a new stove, which is able to run with electricity. And if some of those stoves are very expensive stoves, running in an industrial complex or a chemical plant, then you need to invest a very high amount of money to replace the parts of the complex or plant. > As someone who lives in Ontario, Canada, we got rid of all of our coal in 2014 and have lots of nuclear: Is that the same Canada who sold their uranium-mining or nuclear rod-productions to Russia?
  - throw0101c 2y ago
    > Really? You've never learned about chemical processes, heat, conversions of energy? Isn't this something you would learn in school? [Edit: in another comment in this sub-thread.] > Is that the same Canada who sold their uranium-mining or nuclear rod-productions to Russia? No, this one: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McArthur_River_uranium_mine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McArthur_River_uranium_mine * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigar_Lake_mine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigar_Lake_mine * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_River,_Ontario#Economy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_River,_Ontario#Economy * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_mining_in_Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_mining_in_Canada
- bee_rider 2y ago
  Grid energy sources vary in how dispatchable and dependable they are. Fossil fuel plants are generally quite dispatchable and dependable, in the sense that you can spin up or shut down the generator (there are different types of fossil fuel power plants actually, the some of the worst ones environmentally are called “peaker plants,” they only turn on when there is very high demand, so they tend not to be very efficient). Renewables obviously have some dependability problems (the sun might not be shining one day, the wind might not be blowing). These can be dealt with, but it isn’t free, it should be seen as an engineering opportunity. I did an EE degree, but was more interested in digital and electronics stuff. But they talked enough about the grid a bit in my intro classes before everyone specialized… I’m confused that somebody would respond “as an EE” and ignore the grid. Everyone knew we were hiding a lot behind the circle with the little sin wave on it.

ptero 2y ago

> Coal is providing a very different form of energy, used with very different applications. What are those? Nuclear and renewables uses are indeed very different. Nuclear and coal for base load -- not so much. At least this is what I heard for decades. I would be interested to read a refutation.

PurpleRamen 2y ago
Base load is more of a fairy tail. For the applications I'm talking about, I explained them in a sibling comment.
- throw0101c 2y ago
  > Base load is more of a fairy tail. So the >9 GW of power provided 24/7 by nuclear on the "Supply" tab is a figment of imagination? * https://ieso.ca/power-data https://ieso.ca/power-data
  - PurpleRamen 2y ago
    The importance of the base load is a fairy tale, not the numbers. Nuclear plants idling are a burden for the grid. Without them, you can manage it far more flexible, it seems.

throw0101c 2y ago

> Coal is providing a very different form of energy, used with very different applications. As an EE, I do not understand "different form of energy". How are the electrons and EM fields different between nuclear and coal generation? As someone who lives in Ontario, Canada, we got rid of all of our coal in 2014 and have lots of nuclear: * https://www.ontario.ca/page/end-coal https://www.ontario.ca/page/end-coal

PurpleRamen 2y ago
Really? You've never learned about chemical processes, heat, conversions of energy? Isn't this something you would learn in school? Well, ok, then here is an ELI5: If you have a stove, running with coal, then you can't use electricity to fuel it. You need to buy a new stove, which is able to run with electricity. And if some of those stoves are very expensive stoves, running in an industrial complex or a chemical plant, then you need to invest a very high amount of money to replace the parts of the complex or plant. > As someone who lives in Ontario, Canada, we got rid of all of our coal in 2014 and have lots of nuclear: Is that the same Canada who sold their uranium-mining or nuclear rod-productions to Russia?
- throw0101c 2y ago
  > Really? You've never learned about chemical processes, heat, conversions of energy? Isn't this something you would learn in school? [Edit: in another comment in this sub-thread.] > Is that the same Canada who sold their uranium-mining or nuclear rod-productions to Russia? No, this one: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McArthur_River_uranium_mine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McArthur_River_uranium_mine * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigar_Lake_mine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigar_Lake_mine * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_River,_Ontario#Economy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_River,_Ontario#Economy * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_mining_in_Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_mining_in_Canada
bee_rider 2y ago
Grid energy sources vary in how dispatchable and dependable they are. Fossil fuel plants are generally quite dispatchable and dependable, in the sense that you can spin up or shut down the generator (there are different types of fossil fuel power plants actually, the some of the worst ones environmentally are called “peaker plants,” they only turn on when there is very high demand, so they tend not to be very efficient). Renewables obviously have some dependability problems (the sun might not be shining one day, the wind might not be blowing). These can be dealt with, but it isn’t free, it should be seen as an engineering opportunity. I did an EE degree, but was more interested in digital and electronics stuff. But they talked enough about the grid a bit in my intro classes before everyone specialized… I’m confused that somebody would respond “as an EE” and ignore the grid. Everyone knew we were hiding a lot behind the circle with the little sin wave on it.