Back to threaded view
Full conversation · 3 posts
-
Level 1
Tell me about it...what's more, because of the inherent variability of Wind and Solar, the energy
storage costs would be astronomical if those sources were to be relied upon exclusively. I've posted before about the actual 2018 experience in Britain where all the nation's wind turbines were 'becalmed' for 13 straight days...of course they don't use solar there either...at today's cost for commercial Li-Ion battery storage (~$160K per 200MWhr unit) it would have cost ~$1.2T just for the units, to provide the needed power for that 13 day period...then, because such batteries don't last forever, they would need to be replaced at least every 25 years...just imagine the cost for powering the U.S. with only renewables.
I've also posted the attached link before...it unemotionally explains the capabilities of all possible non-fossil power sources...written by the former Chief Scientific Advisor to he UK Department of Energy and Climate Change. (note the Dr. MacKay gave Wind Power a density of 3W/sq m).
Fortunately, the Biden Administration is working with private investors to fund critical Advanced Nuclear Reactor designs, as well as Nuclear Fuel Recycling Programs...
https://www.energy.gov/ne/advanced-reactor-technologies
Don't get me wrong, there are definite uses for Wind and Solar, but studies show that beyond a 30-40% 'penetration' their benefit turns negative...we absolutely need Nuclear Power for a reliable electrical grid.
-
Level 1
Until climate alarmists push nuclear first, we'll know climate change is not a serious problem...
...or at least not a science driven issue.
Evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant, then it tries to silence good.
End of conversation