|
|
|
|
|
by Manuel_D
807 days ago
|
|
> My understanding is that solar and wind are cheaper than nuclear even when accounting for storage. This understanding is either based on geographically limited storage options (hydroelectric storage), or is incorrect. The amount of batteries required to even out intermittent sources is many times more than the amount of batteries produced. The cost of a 1 GWh facility is very different from a 1 TWh facility. The latter is 2x the amount of batteries produced worldwide each year. But it's only 2 hours of the USA's electricity consumption. That's how big of a mismatch there exists between battery supply and the demands of grid storage. > That's before you get to the externalized costs, such as waste disposal and decomissioning. Waste disposal and decommissioning are already factored into nuclear power's cost. They have to pre-pay the cost of disposal and decommissioning. |
|
Vogtle is $170-$180/MWh. https://www.powermag.com/blog/plant-vogtle-not-a-star-but-a-...
New solar is on average $40/MWh: https://emp.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/utility_scale_solar_...
Back in 2022 when prices were higher, NREL put batteries at $482/kWh:
https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy23osti/85332.pdf
That's $87/MWh for storage, backing out the battery lifetime and round trip efficiency from the same report.
So depending on the time usage of electricity, the average solar+battery installation will have an averaging of $40/MWh and $127/Mwh electricity.
That's using old prices. It's cheaper today, and will get cheaper in the future.