• schroedingershat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Because they have weeks or months long unplanned outages every year, often correlated and are over-concentrated geographically so fail-over requires huge transmission overprovision.

    As to that last, building a $20/W generator and keeping it in hot shutdown to use for 200 hours a year costs thousands of dollars per MWh. There are vastly cheaper ways to get 100 hour storage.

    • p1mrx@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Has anyone actually built 100 hour storage at a significant scale? There’s potential for things like iron-air and green hydrogen, but they seem like uncertain emerging technologies.

      • schroedingershat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Pumped hydro exists in many places (and is available pretty much everywhere). There are also demo installs for other low-discharge batteries. Also “put another battery next to the other battery” isn’t some undiscovered technology, as soon as it’s necessary LFP is ready even if you assume there’s no other option.

        It doesn’t really matter though because wind/solar has demonstrably higher grid penetration capability with less storage and less overprovision than nuclear. Geographic over-concentration and unreliability is a much bigger downside than intermittency in that regard.

        • p1mrx@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          So for grid reliability, it would be better to build (e.g.) a distributed fleet of 100 MW reactors than a single 1 GW reactor?

          • schroedingershat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah that would likely improve it, but then you’re paying as much for the fuel as the renewable grid’s total cost and much more on top of that for security and O&M. You also need to quadruple uranium mining overnight to just do the first fuel load for enough new generation to keep up with new wind and solar installs.

            Rather than going to more and more tortured extents to try and make nuclear work, we could just do the thing that’s working extremely well. In the absolute worst case where we assume medium and long term storage is impossible rather than not yet necessary, the total emissions from the residual thermal generation over tue next century are less than the emissions from delaying the transition to try and make nuclear work.