4 ms·

The problem is wind and solar are un reliable. Need massive storage needed for them to be 24x7. Then there is the 2nd problem problem that transmission line

The problem is wind and solar are un reliable. Need massive storage needed for them to be 24x7. Then there is the 2nd problem problem that transmission line capacity is needed to get it from its stored location ( maybe hydro or batteries ) to where it's needed.

hooverd 2y ago
They're also building out crazy amounts of nuclear.
- pfdietz 2y ago
  Their nuclear build out is behind plans, while their renewable build out is ahead of plans.
  - hooverd 2y ago
    Has there ever been a nuclear build out ahead of schedule? It certainly seems more prone to that vs renewables that you can plonk down anywhere without too much overhead.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
pfdietz 2y ago
There is no reason why many of the batteries can't be colocated with PV. They take up much less area. Properly configured, batteries can take DC from the PV modules and share the same inverter and grid connection. This is especially useful because typically a field will oversize the PV modules relative to the inverter.
mgfist 2y ago
Just another problem to be solved (and which is already in progress)
lolinder 2y ago
I love Technology Connections' take on this line of argument [0]: > When there's a new innovation which changes how we do things for the better, its benefits are obvious. ... However when the "But Sometimes" rears its ugly head, people tend to freak out. Suddenly all those benefits go away, because in this one particular facet of stoplight functionality, the wasteful and maintenance-heavy incandescent lamp is accidentally superior. Suddenly, when a new solution presents a new problem, all we think about is the problem. Yes, there are problems that exist with solar that don't exist with other electrical generation systems. That is not, by itself, evidence that solar will not be sufficient by itself as we solve those problems, and it's not a good reason to slow adoption of a piece of technology that is better in almost every way. Everything suggests we're going to fix the "but sometimes"—as others have noted there are many different paths being successfully explored at this point—and everything suggests that solar will still be both cheaper and better for the environment even when you factor in the fix. [0] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GiYO1TObNz8 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GiYO1TObNz8
- culi 2y ago
  I don't think this is a fair criticism. It's not a "but sometimes" so much as "but X hours a day" and "but during X season". There are genuine problems unique to solar (e.g. the Duck Curve) and genuine problems unique to wind
  - lolinder 2y ago
    There are also genuine problems unique to LED lamps in signals that we solved with little heaters. I don't think the amount of time involved in the "sometimes" matters so much as the fact that the new problems are readily surmountable (with many solutions both in progress and already deployed) and the fact that people use the new problems as justification for a reactionary desire to jetison the technology entirely without even trying to surmount them.
  - standardUser 2y ago
    Why do people still continue to declare "you know solar only works during the day" like they've discovered some fatal flaw that no one has ever thought of? The "genuine problem" is not a problem. It's an aspect of this technology that is thoroughly incorporated into the science and engineering.
icehawk 2y ago
Please, name a generation technology that does not need transmission capacity to get it from where it is generated to where it is needed. Even coal plants stopped being built in the middle of cities half a century ago.
- eastof 2y ago
  The reason it's a bigger issue for solar is that you don't get to choose where the best place to put it is, and it might be really inconvenient. Coal plant you can intentionally put it outside the city, but not too far and where a flat road can connect them. Solar is usually best placed in a desert, and usually people don't live anywhere near deserts, and usually they're separated from where people live by mountain ranges (i.e. the Mojave to LA).
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    A desert isn't that much of an advantage. If you see a major focus on deserts, it's because transmission lines aren't all that expensive.
  - thowawatp302 2y ago
    That same Mojave desert has the Hoover Dam— it supplies 15% of its power to LA. (Of 58% sent to California) That was a problem solved 91 years ago— in 1933.
yen223 2y ago
It amuses me to imagine engineers reading this comment and going "Oh crap - we totally forgot that the sun doesn't shine at night! Kill the projects immediately!"
- stonethrowaway 2y ago
  It wouldn’t be engineers saying this.
bushbaba 2y ago
Water heaters are 18% of a homes U.S. energy usage. No reason I can’t shift when my hot water is heated throughout the day. Lots of similar industrial use cases
bamboozled 2y ago
It's getting old now

hooverd 2y ago

They're also building out crazy amounts of nuclear.

pfdietz 2y ago
Their nuclear build out is behind plans, while their renewable build out is ahead of plans.
- hooverd 2y ago
  Has there ever been a nuclear build out ahead of schedule? It certainly seems more prone to that vs renewables that you can plonk down anywhere without too much overhead.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]

pfdietz 2y ago

There is no reason why many of the batteries can't be colocated with PV. They take up much less area. Properly configured, batteries can take DC from the PV modules and share the same inverter and grid connection. This is especially useful because typically a field will oversize the PV modules relative to the inverter.

mgfist 2y ago

Just another problem to be solved (and which is already in progress)

lolinder 2y ago

I love Technology Connections' take on this line of argument [0]: > When there's a new innovation which changes how we do things for the better, its benefits are obvious. ... However when the "But Sometimes" rears its ugly head, people tend to freak out. Suddenly all those benefits go away, because in this one particular facet of stoplight functionality, the wasteful and maintenance-heavy incandescent lamp is accidentally superior. Suddenly, when a new solution presents a new problem, all we think about is the problem. Yes, there are problems that exist with solar that don't exist with other electrical generation systems. That is not, by itself, evidence that solar will not be sufficient by itself as we solve those problems, and it's not a good reason to slow adoption of a piece of technology that is better in almost every way. Everything suggests we're going to fix the "but sometimes"—as others have noted there are many different paths being successfully explored at this point—and everything suggests that solar will still be both cheaper and better for the environment even when you factor in the fix. [0] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GiYO1TObNz8 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GiYO1TObNz8

culi 2y ago
I don't think this is a fair criticism. It's not a "but sometimes" so much as "but X hours a day" and "but during X season". There are genuine problems unique to solar (e.g. the Duck Curve) and genuine problems unique to wind
- lolinder 2y ago
  There are also genuine problems unique to LED lamps in signals that we solved with little heaters. I don't think the amount of time involved in the "sometimes" matters so much as the fact that the new problems are readily surmountable (with many solutions both in progress and already deployed) and the fact that people use the new problems as justification for a reactionary desire to jetison the technology entirely without even trying to surmount them.
- standardUser 2y ago
  Why do people still continue to declare "you know solar only works during the day" like they've discovered some fatal flaw that no one has ever thought of? The "genuine problem" is not a problem. It's an aspect of this technology that is thoroughly incorporated into the science and engineering.

icehawk 2y ago

Please, name a generation technology that does not need transmission capacity to get it from where it is generated to where it is needed. Even coal plants stopped being built in the middle of cities half a century ago.

eastof 2y ago
The reason it's a bigger issue for solar is that you don't get to choose where the best place to put it is, and it might be really inconvenient. Coal plant you can intentionally put it outside the city, but not too far and where a flat road can connect them. Solar is usually best placed in a desert, and usually people don't live anywhere near deserts, and usually they're separated from where people live by mountain ranges (i.e. the Mojave to LA).
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  A desert isn't that much of an advantage. If you see a major focus on deserts, it's because transmission lines aren't all that expensive.
- thowawatp302 2y ago
  That same Mojave desert has the Hoover Dam— it supplies 15% of its power to LA. (Of 58% sent to California) That was a problem solved 91 years ago— in 1933.

yen223 2y ago

It amuses me to imagine engineers reading this comment and going "Oh crap - we totally forgot that the sun doesn't shine at night! Kill the projects immediately!"

stonethrowaway 2y ago
It wouldn’t be engineers saying this.

bushbaba 2y ago

Water heaters are 18% of a homes U.S. energy usage. No reason I can’t shift when my hot water is heated throughout the day. Lots of similar industrial use cases

bamboozled 2y ago

It's getting old now