Top
Best
New

Posted by xbmcuser 9 hours ago

Solar surpasses nuclear power globally for first time(www.pv-magazine.com)
434 points | 277 commentspage 3
mhh__ 8 hours ago|
Unless nuclear gets dramatically cheaper one should expect to see basically just the minimum amount of it to maintain grid stability / heavy industry, or something in that direction (I think). Obviously this is quite path dependant.

The one thing I really wish people would take away from thinking about energy / grid composition and so on is that its a portfolio construction problem.

If you ever, ever, see anyone banging on about how expensive or cheap a particularly type of generation is please just write them off as either an idiot or a liar - what matters is the cost of constructing a portfolio of electricity production that meets the requirements of a nation e.g. running an industrial economy solely off solar power is probably impossible but it seems realistic to imagine a "modern" (politics aside) economy that runs off sending emails on a mixture of solar power and storage.

pfdietz 1 hour ago||
> one should expect to see basically just the minimum amount of it to maintain grid stability / heavy industry

That minimum amount is none.

yxhuvud 8 hours ago|||
In my country we have people, lots of them, that would prefer to forget that renewables forget and to massively build out nuclear to meet demand. In that situation it makes sense to bang the energy cost drum. Yes, obviously the network needs to be kept running and that may take some added nuclear and investment in the existing hydro plants, but at the end of the day a sizeable part will going to be renewables as it is so much cheaper.
__MatrixMan__ 7 hours ago||
Centralized energy infrastructure tends to be a military target. Russia targeted Ukraine's nuke plants right off the bat. The US appears to be losing to Iran one strait, pipeline, refinery, or tanker at a time. The neat thing about solar is that it's not cost effective to shoot at--you're gonna spend more on the drone than your enemy is gonna spend replacing that panel. All of the things nuclear has going for it also make it a juicy target, and I'd rather pick up pieces of bombed panels than pieces of bombed reactors.

So if you get tired of banging the energy cost drum, consider a fill or two on the adversarial resilience drum.

Or if you prefer, consider resilience in the face of a heat wave. The fear that maybe the power will go out mid-disaster... it's just not actionable. That changes with a distributed system: you can channel it into making sure your house's or your neighborhood's battery is up to the task.

yangm97 7 hours ago|||
Your enemy doesn’t need to bomb the solar panels from a solar plant, they can just target the grid connection instead.

Unless you make rooftop solar + batteries with variable rate accessible for everyone (like Australia is said to have done), then yeah there will be no easy target.

But even then, your enemy could still target your grid stabilization infrastructure/peaker plants and make those who were not able to afford batteries lose power.

I wish grid operators could have some sort of remote control/feedback of “smart residential inverters” to be able to stabilize the last mile of the grid independently, maybe through a lora mesh or whatever their meters use.

crote 6 hours ago||
The grid tends to be somewhat grid-shaped, and even industrial-scale solar doesn't usually have a large centralized grid hookup.

It's like trying to starve a country by bombing its supermarkets: you could try, but in reality you're mostly wasting bombs.

PaulDavisThe1st 7 hours ago|||
> more on the drone than your enemy is gonna spend replacing that panel.

supply chain, supply chain, supply chain.

dalyons 6 hours ago||
It’s not very hard to make solar panels. Almost any country could spin up a plant if they had to. Or buy from a diverse set of other countries.
Joel_Mckay 8 hours ago|||
Renewables often make more sense for robust decentralized infrastructure.

However, the upfront cost of Full-sized Fission power facilities are often still around 1/2 to 1/3 the end user $/kWh. The issues arise with the long term waste stewardship costs, and the cognitive disconnect people can engineer their way out of the liabilities.

Now that "AI" data-centers are acting like a public infrastructure equity siphon, in some places private solar can have a payback period measured in under a few years. =3

braiamp 7 hours ago||
What? Nuclear is cheap to build when the rules hold still. The problem is that while a plant is being under construction (which can be fast), policies change and on a multi-year build, every change means rework and financing costs on capital that is sitting idle. That's the main driver of prices, along with restrictions that keep tightening, the most overbearing being the linear no-threshold model. It's not a problem inherent to nuclear build out. Gas is faster and more modular because it is less encumbered and because we have far more experience building it. If gas/carbon construction was as hampered as nuclear is, the costs would be equivalent. They are not, because coal and gas have the backing of powerful interests that would not let that kind of policy instability happen. Meanwhile, nuclear has no backer with the same amount of resources
dalyons 6 hours ago||
This oft quoted idea that nukes are only expensive because of incompetent regulations, and if they just got out of poor nuclear a way it would be affordable, doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.

There are a lot of different regulatory regimes all over the world and nukes are expensive in all of them. The only way to make them cheapish is if the state builds , secures and insures them (eg china) , but that’s just hiding the costs in govt subsidies . And even then chinas % share of nukes continues to decline because they cost more than anything else.

braiamp 6 hours ago||
[flagged]
whh 3 hours ago||
We probably need a lot more nuclear then.
linsomniac 8 hours ago||
Now that PV panels are less expensive than cabinet grade plywood, it makes a lot of sense to get some independence through local generation.
PaulDavisThe1st 7 hours ago|
[dead]
mitxela 5 hours ago||
This can't be true. It must be fake news, because my telescreen told me that nuclear is the only viable future. Coincidentally most of the world's uranium comes from Russia.
antisthenes 7 hours ago||
The power of the sun in the palm of my hand.
Supermancho 6 hours ago||
Another milestone in our journey to become a Kardashev I civilization.
wizardforhire 4 hours ago||
Pedantic fyi: Solar is nuclear…

I’ll see myself out

tianji-astrolog 7 hours ago||
[flagged]
jdw64 9 hours ago||
[dead]
sehw 9 hours ago|
[flagged]
More comments...