Green Energy

2290 readers

23 users here now

Everything about energy production and storage.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

poVoq@slrpnk.net

SteveKLord@slrpnk.net

226

Nuclear too slow to replace coal, and baseload “simply can’t compete” with wind and solar, AEMO boss says (reneweconomy.com.au)

submitted 5 months ago by phneutral to c/energy@slrpnk.net

128 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The head of the Australian energy market operator AEMO, Daniel Westerman, has rejected nuclear power as a way to replace Australia's ageing coal-fired power stations, arguing that it is too slow and too expensive. In addition, baseload power sources are not competitive in a grid dominated by wind and solar energy anyway.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That's really really expensive unless you already have natural upper and lower reservoirs.

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

It is? More than batteries?

Im surprised.

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Based on some numbers I looked up a couple of years ago:

LiPo 15¢/Wh

Flywheel 15¢/Wh

Compressed air 12¢/Wh

Pumped hydro 11¢/Wh

I'll try to dig up the sources when I get home, but the cost advantage isn't too large, so digging your own reservoirs would put it as more expensive.

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Thanks! I guess the hydro is with natural reservoirs?

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago

Yeah I think so

[–] Sethayy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

Just cause lithium ion is pretty subsidied and quite energy dense