News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Nuclear power is too slow by themitigating on Friday December 16, 2022 @02:08PM (#34018661)
Why wouldn't there be sun in the winter in most places?
Re:Nuclear power is too slow by adamsb6 on Friday December 16, 2022 @02:39PM (#34019149)
In the northern hemisphere the winter solstice is five days from today.

Where I am, in Seattle, the sun will be above the horizon for only about 8.5 hours. It will also likely be cloudy.

Contrast this with the summer solstice, where we get about 16 hours with the sun above the horizon.

Re:Nuclear power is too slow by fulafel on Saturday December 17, 2022 @04:23AM (#34026249)
Less sun, more wind, vs no wind and no sun.
Re:Nuclear power is too slow by prottog on Friday December 16, 2022 @02:15PM (#34018765)
I don't know what GP meant about "most places", but I guess generally places that have a winter (away from the tropics, that is) are cloudier in the winter, as well as by definition having lower solar irradiation. Most of Europe is in the unenviable position of having higher power requirements precisely when solar potential is at the lowest[0].

[0]: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Typical-winter-and-summe...

Re:Nuclear power is too slow by fulafel on Saturday December 17, 2022 @04:27AM (#34026270)
The power requirements are fixable by better insulated housing (see eg passive houses).

Practically free natural gas has kept people from investing in energy efficient housing, just like in warmer places where people use AC wastefully in poorly insulated buildings.

Re:Nuclear power is too slow by peteradio on Friday December 16, 2022 @02:29PM (#34018986)
Ironically during a nuclear winter event which may or may not be a fraudulent science meme concocted during the cold war. And yet we have had points in fairly recent human history where we had years long stretches of problems caused by volcanic activity. All we need then is some way to turn nuclear fuel directly to enriched calories.