| > yet nknown amounts because they are intermittent The intermittency is sufficiently predictable that we know the overbuild requirement well enough for a variety of possible solutions, including cheapest overall, or least storage requirements. I tend to go for x10 in armchair discussions like these because that's the level needed given the current global average power factor of PV. > Are they getting cheaper enough? Including all the required overbuilding and all the (yet non-existent) grid-scale storage that is required for renewable energy? Yes. > grid storage required at these scales is literally nowhere to be found The fact I can say the same for the uranium mines needed for sufficient nuclear power, isn't an argument against nuclear power. Why? Because we don't have a current need for those mines. Why is this a useful comparison? Because until we decide we want to electrify transport (it's mainly about that not about PV vs. Wind vs. Hydro), there hasn't been demand for that many battery factories. But in both cases, we know what to do, and how to do it. |
Is it?
> that we know the overbuild requirement well enough for a variety of possible solutions
Here's a quiet night from a few days ago. 0 solar production. https://twitter.com/energybants/status/1647799729734971396
--- start quote ---
Germany's 66.5 GW of installed wind is only producing as much as the 3 reactors that turned off last night used to produce.
400% expansion of wind would only provide half present need!
--- end quote ---
> Yes.
And the source for that claim is?
> The fact I can say the same for the uranium mines needed for sufficient nuclear power, isn't an argument against nuclear power.
You're trying to confuse fuel requirements with grid storage requirements. One we have. Other we don't, and almost no one talks about the cost and the requirements. See the quote and link above.
> Because until we decide we want to electrify transport (it's mainly about that not about PV vs. Wind vs. Hydro), there hasn't been demand for that many battery factories.
What does electric transport have to do with an absolute requirement for renewable energy sources to be backed up with grid-scale energy sources?
> But in both cases, we know what to do, and how to do it.
Ah yes. It's that emotionally charged magical thinking again. If we pretend that problems don't exist, they don't exist.
Meanwhile, renewable energy is:
- intermittent
- is extremely slow to ramp up
For both cases you need to have grid-scale energy storage to handle demand. And overbuild renewable storage in for cases when (not if) generation drops.
And yet, no one talks about the cumulative costs for that (and the fact that we literally don't have storage on that scale).
And yet, everyone is clapping each other on the back that hey, there's this Morocco-UK project that is 100% cheaper than nuclear be cause estimations have said so, and so much faster to build than nuclear even though even estimations say it'll take 10 years.