Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by cycomanic on Wednesday June 15, 2022 @01:28PM
(#31756283)
There are many studies which showed how much overprovisioning you need to go to 100% renewable with different size grids. None of these are outrageous, but it's also nothing we currently need to think about. We can easily scale up renewable capacity to 70% without significant overprovisioning. So we really just need to build lots more renewables at the moment.
Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by ncmncm on Wednesday June 15, 2022 @03:47PM
(#31758436)
If you don't have renewables for a while, and transmission line availability flags, you import anhydrous ammonia from the tropics. So, you need only minimal over-provisioning and local storage.
Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by redisman on Wednesday June 15, 2022 @10:40PM
(#31761969)
But then you presumably need to build these extra power plants that can use that fuel?
Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by pfdietz on Thursday June 16, 2022 @10:24PM
(#31773471)
A combined cycle powerplant is about 10% of the cost, per unit power output, of a nuclear power plant. So we could completely back up a renewable grid with CC plants and nuclear could still be much more expensive.
Is it enough wind to meet all the demand at night? And what happens when it stops blowing as much as expected for a long period of time[0]? You still need baseline power generation for quite some time to come until those questions that, well, keep getting hand waved away are solved.
0: https://fortune.com/2021/09/16/the-u-k-went-all-in-on-wind-p...