|
|
|
|
|
by robocat
1412 days ago
|
|
I strongly disagree with your point “we can install twice the capacity in MW for solar and still have money left over to put into a smarter grid or storage” because you appear to be making up numbers - what is your reference to sources? You used MW in that comment - your new comment is not clarifying whether you made a mistake or what your actual point is. LCOE is an averaged cost/MWh, which is absolutely inappropriate to use when discussing whether nuclear is expensive or not, because LCOE ignores usage patterns (which you obviously know, but are hand-waving away as “money left over”). From your Wikipedia link: “One of the most important potential limitations of LCOE is that it may not control for time effects associated with matching electricity production to demand” and “To ensure enough electricity is always available to meet demand, storage or backup generation may be required, which adds costs that are not included in the LCOE”. Finally, almost any plot that uses “installed capacity” is deceptive by design: because capacity factors make solar/wind appear 5x better, which is not a trivial difference on a graph. Instantaneous capacity is usually not relevant (except during “peaker” loads). |
|