We're using natural gas peaking so far, but this is actually still not that cheap.

I am of the attitude that even with no additional fossil fuel infrastructure constructed, we would be fine if we made an effort.

A mix for new generation of something like 70% solar/wind/batteries, 10% better grid interties, 10% expanded peaking hydro, and 10% a better system of load modulation, works just fine.

Load following with a market rate for things like water heaters, car chargers, and various industrial processes is something that's been implemented in other countries half-seriously, but only treated as an epithet or a scam here. To actually work, you can't just "Charge people a market rate" and expect them to fiddle with the breaker box, you have to actually integrate that feed into a decision-making algorithm run by home automation, which can make distinctions like "We need the car to be 90% full by 7AM, but we can adjust between charging at 1KW and charging at 6KW to minimize expected billing based on a minute to minute rate schedule. The water heater can range between 130F and 160F as required due to a mixing valve. The average dew point in the HVAC system needs to stay between 40F and 60F on a three-hourly basis, but can be modulated in ten minute increments according to demand." These sorts of interfaces need to be simple enough that Grandma can establish them conversationally.

Grid interties allow Los Angeles to sell Boston sunlight and Chicago to sell Houston wind.

Peaking hydro is just pumped storage minus the new pump and the new dam. An existing hydroelectric dam just gets refitted for twice as many generators and starts running on a 50% duty cycle, while allowing more variation in the water level.

Ive heard people claim that but the only example of decarbonizing to actually ever happen is France with nuclear and that was not particularly expensive (and happened 30 years ago)

Wow, 3 wrong statements in one sentence!

- the carbon intensity of pretty much every country's grid has dropped dramatically in the last 25 years. First by replacing coal with natgas, then by adding renewables.

- nuclear cost France $2/W in 1982 dollars ($6.50 today). solar+batteries cost California $4/W in 2023 dollars.

- the late 70s was a lot more than 30 years ago. (I was born in the 70's, I wish I was still in my 30's).

You have quite a few wrong statements in your reply! The french nuclear fleet rolled out mostly in the 1980’s not the “late 70’s” but that’s unimportant. The main issue with your statement the “solar+batteries” doesnt include enough batteries to have reliable power. The amount of batteries installed in. California still depends on fossil fuels to meet demand on cloudy and windless weeks so its not deeply decarbonizing the way nuclear does