this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2024
626 points (69.1% liked)

Memes

44926 readers
2395 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 92 points 1 month ago (33 children)

There are downsides to nuclear these days. Incredibly high cost with a massive delay before they're functioning. Solar + wind + pumped hydro + district heating is where it's at in 2024.

[–] ByteJunk@lemmy.world 42 points 1 month ago (21 children)

This.

Also, tie together more countries' power grids to even out production and demand of renewables, and reduce the need for other backup sources.

For a fraction of the cost of nuclear, increase the storage capacity as well. We've had days where the price per MWh was negative in many hours, because of excess production.

The barriers to carbon free energy aren't technical, they're purely political.

[–] fellowmortal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Please understand that negative prices are the market for electricity breaking down! That is not a good thing. It should mean that if you have solar panels on your roof you have to pay to participate in the national grid because you are dumping energy into the grid when it can't use it, but special rules have been made for renewable plants. Literally, imagine a contract-to-supply for wind or solar...

[–] ByteJunk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I understand very well the implications of the negative price, which is why I advocated NOT to spend trillions in nuclear, when issues of balancing demand and production can be solved for a fraction of what nuclear costs.

load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (30 replies)