2 ms·
> China is pursuing the strategy you're describing, but there's a reason they're also building nuclear, they're increasing LNG infrastructure, they haven't phas
by locknitpicker 1mo ago
> China is pursuing the strategy you're describing, but there's a reason they're also building nuclear, they're increasing LNG infrastructure, they haven't phased out coal, and they've built a huge amount of oil storage.
This opinion is rather simplistic. China is reported to have 60% of it's energy needs already supplied by renewable sources, but this transition creates different types of challenges such as preserving the power grid's inertia. Otherwise you might see yourself in a scenario such as the Spanish blackout. This means having in place strategies for fast response (gas) and baseline (hydro storage, nuclear) to prevent the scenario.
- dv_dt 1mo agobatteries are the fastest response power. gas is high maintenance, & bad capex as an intermittent source.
- locknitpicker 1mo ago> batteries are the fastest response power. gas is high maintenance, & bad capex as an intermittent source. Batteries have a limited capacity and have a higher investment cost. Gas is the standard option for fast response. Pumped-storage hydro has by far the highest capex and has a heavy environment impact. It's baffling how people show up in this sort of discussions arguing that standard tried-and-true strategies somehow don't work. Quite odd.
- dv_dt 1mo agoBatteries and solar have been beating lifetime cost of fast response gas turbines for five years or more. Now with uncontrolled fossil fuel cost spikes the operating costs of gas are highly variable compared to the pretty much flat investment and operating cost on battery + solar. if one were comparing battery plus renewables for full seasonal offsets are tighter, but the costs are so much lower, you can provision more and plan to dump power in the summer (or maybe not as this last long hot fossil fueled climate change summer will drive new demand for a/c)