[pydry]

>Of course and that needs to be factored into renewable supplies which massively increases their cost.

It is and it does but being 5x cheaper means even a massive increase in cost still doesnt put it in the same league as nuclear power.

[realusername]

It has to be way more than 5 times cheaper to compensate the drop to single digits capacity percentages like last winter.

[timellis-smith]

That doesn't matter because it's not like you can double renewables to increase redundancy (no wind is no wind no matter how many turbines you have)- you need another more expensive energy source as well.

[illiarian]

To cover the drop in generation for the night of April 15, even 400% wind capacity would not be enough.

It was a rather regular, quiet, night in a nation of 80 million people in the middle of Europe. Which means that it was a quiet night across much of Europe.

[quonn]

As if there would be just one way to compensate this.

- More renewables can be added

- Storage can compensate for this

- Power can be distributed across large areas

- The amount needed at night is not fixed. It only appears fixed because we don‘t care so much. It can be reduced significantly by using devices and processes in a smarter way depending on the availability of power.