• chris@l.roofo.cc
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    Yes and that nuclear power plant is not shut down at day time. Instead renewables will be throttled if there is an overproduction. That is the either/or scenario that I mean. Every watt that is produced by a nuclear power plant is pretty much a constant and displaces renewables. It also keeps the base energy costs high because they are constantly running.

    • arrow74@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      By putting a higher percentage on nuclear you reduce the need to create storage capabilities. Nuclear should ideally cover a majority of nighttime hours with the rest being handled through solar storage and wind.

      Yes this will be more expensive than the current solution which is to fire up the coal plants at night, but some costs are worth it. Maybe this can be handled by battery storage, but no one has done that yet so it is hard to gage the final cost.

      I care just a little more about not burning fossil fuels than the cost

      • chris@l.roofo.cc
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Get lost with fossil fuels. In the time that enough nuclear is built we can build enough storage and renewables to make coal, gas and nuclear mostly obsolete.