this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
193 points (93.3% liked)

Technology

59415 readers
1777 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
193
New research shows renewables are more profitable than nuclear power (www.pv-magazine.com)
submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
57 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

New research shows renewables are more profitable than nuclear power::In a recent study, researchers from the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), the Stockholm School of Economics (SSE), and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) questioned the planned development of new nuclear capacities in the energy strategies of the United States and certain European countries.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's base load, not baseline and it's arguable that it's not necessary: https://cleantechnica.com/2022/06/28/we-dont-need-base-load-power/

[–] qaz@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Large scale energy storage isn't there yet (afaik, please link otherwise), and adjusting demand with scalable hydrogen production isn't there either. Meanwhile, France's nuclear plants can adjust their output by 900MW in 30 minutes to mitigate increased demand or reduced supply due to weather.

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Did you read the article?

[–] qaz@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Yes, it keeps talking about how near-firm wind/solar are significantly cheaper, quicker to adjust output and produce higher quality electricity (because you wouldn't need to change AC frequency) but only credits "4 hour batteries" never specifying which would be used and how you would build enough for the entire grid.