Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by ElectronCharge on Wednesday June 15, 2022 @12:50PM
(#31755742)
It’s worse than that. Storage can, at best, provide for some interval of backup while wind/solar aren’t providing enough power.
The problem is that “100 year”, “1,000 year” or worse events will require more than currently stored. Then, potentially millions of people will be at risk of injury or death from cold or heat.
Reliable generation of at least enough to cover survival seems necessary.
Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by dane-pgp on Wednesday June 15, 2022 @01:39PM
(#31756456)
> “100 year”, “1,000 year” or worse events
Okay, then we can keep gas power stations around for another 100 years and only turn them on for the few days they are needed. Probably, though, after 50 years we will have solved climate change and energy storage (or wiped ourselves out) anyway.
Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by ncmncm on Wednesday June 15, 2022 @04:26PM
(#31758990)
Anytime local storage runs low and transmission line capacity is exceeded, you order a shipment of synthetic ammonia or hydrogen from the tropics. There will be plenty competing for your business.
The only studies you'll see are that they proved to be economical on a certain day, or maaaybe overnight. ...but there are zero studies that any solar and/or wind (even combined), can provide consistent power for a full year. ...because that is not currently possible with economical tech.