this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2023
156 points (94.8% liked)

World News

32310 readers
505 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Get those construction contacts signed!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sunbeam60@lemmy.one -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If intermittent energy would be held to the same standards of sustained energy, you’d see the real price. Right now, the dirty secret is that renewables are integrated into our energy supply by having a crap-tonne of gas capacity (and importing nuclear energy from France) standing ready on poor renewable days.

Go look at any historic data of U.K. power generation. We have multiple periods every year where there’s barely any wind and solar generated for a week. How do you propose to supply exactly every Watt required, at every second of the day, running only on renewables?

If your answer is batteries or pumped storage then please go look at battery storage capacities and what a week of energy needs look like for the U.K.? You’d have to strip mine the entire planet’s worth of supply lithium and other required metals to be able to do it … and if you think nuclear is expensive, have a look at battery storage.

If your answer is “imports” then my retort would be that every country has to solve this problem and we can’t just “turtles all the way down”-solve this problem. On the same days that wind turbines are still in the U.K. they are still in Denmark, Norway, Germany. Where does the energy come from then? Oh, they’ll just import their electricity from Eastern Europe and we can buy their little renewable generation for that week? Ok, but then you’ve just transitioned to coal plants in Poland, by way of a long supply chain. Every country has to solve this problem.

If your answer is “we just need to build such an excess of renewables that we have enough even on still/gray days” then we are back to cost of guaranteed generation, which is how renewable energy providers should be measured anyway. Where does their backup come from? If you held renewable energy supplies liable for guaranteed supply rather than just accept “oh on some days, you can’t generate any power” you’d see a then buy their supply from backup gas. As they currently do, they can just squirm away from the accountability.

Having said that, I’m a HUGE fan of renewable/intermittent energy. We need to build more, fast! Lots and lots more.

But we do have to answer the uncomfortable question of how we back it up too. That’s included in the price of nuclear.

So what do we do? Import our way out of it, moving the generation to remote, cheap, foreign coal? Over, and over-build renewables, thereby making it extremely costly. Accept gas peak generation, thereby keeping carbon in the mix? Or nuclear?

I know which way I’d choose.

[–] Ooops@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You could have made an actual argument here... but then you decided on the "renewables only work because of nuclear imports from France" fairy tale.

And we all know that this is a lie and also who likes to tell it. So please, stop reading that bullshit and use those trash tabloids as the only thing they are somewhat useful as: toilet paper ...

[–] sunbeam60@lemmy.one -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I no point did I make that argument. I posed a series of questions. Right now renewables only integrate because of masses of gas plants.

[–] Ooops@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Right now, the dirty secret is that renewables are integrated into our energy supply by having a crap-tonne of gas capacity (and importing nuclear energy from France) standing ready on poor renewable days.

You’d have to strip mine the entire planet’s worth of supply lithium and other required metals to be able to do it

Neither of these are questions. These are statements. False ones repeated again and again by the same fossil fuel and nuclear lobbyists lying to you.

Oh, sorry. No. They don't lie. They pay millions for desinformation so people like you tell the lie while seriously thinking it's true. That might actually be worse even but ymmv...

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

over-build renewables, thereby making it extremely costly

Compared to nuclear? Go check out the cost and schedule overruns for Hinkley C and then talk to me about cost. $40 billion and counting so far.

[–] sunbeam60@lemmy.one -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, compared to the cost that proponents of an all-renewable strategy argue it would cost.

Both nuclear and massive-oversupply of renewables are pricey. The difference is one works on a quiet night, while the other doesn’t.

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] sunbeam60@lemmy.one -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sigh. Really?

I’ll show you all the world’s power grid planners, combined, making a choice to include nuclear in their decarbonised grid planning!

But I’m sure you know better than all of them.

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Go right ahead.