Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by gglon 252 days ago
The claim hinges entirely on the narrow definition of "large-scale energy generation." For the UK, with its high seasonal energy demand and low winter solar output, the cost of generation is almost irrelevant next to the cost of firming that power for 24/7/365 availability. While the paper[1] shows solar PV and daily-cycle batteries are getting cheaper, it also shows seasonal storage solutions like hydrogen are still an order of magnitude too expensive and inefficient (huge capex for electrolyzers/storage + poor round-trip efficiency). So providing reliable, 24/7/365 baseload power from PV + storage in the UK is demonstrably not cheaper than gas or nuclear today.

[1] https://www.authorea.com/users/960972/articles/1329770/maste...

1 comments

The per-kWh capacity cost at the link for hydrogen is very high compared to others I've seen. I wonder at the assumptions going into it. Are they assuming above-surface compressed hydrogen tanks, or liquid hydrogen?

Ultra cheap thermal storage promises cost at least an order of magnitude below that.