|
|
|
|
|
by gwright
807 days ago
|
|
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by 90%. 90% of what? You can't just have 90% of power generated by renewables and 10% by fossil fuels because there are times when you get 0% from renewables and so your fossil fuel plants need to provide 100% of the power. So you spent all that money on renewable infrastructure and didn't even get the benefit of shuttering your fossil fuel plants. |
|
What you've written here isn't persuasive. Are you trying to say that keeping gas peaker plants as a backup will mean renewables are more expensive than nuclear? Where is your analysis that fleshes that out?