Woo! Unfortunately, this does not necessarily mean that we won't be running fossil fuel power plants in the future, since renewable energy sources tend to release energy in uneven bursts that...
Woo!
Unfortunately, this does not necessarily mean that we won't be running fossil fuel power plants in the future, since renewable energy sources tend to release energy in uneven bursts that don't match with demand. But it does mean that meaningful changes are going to be made in the near future.
also, nuclear power plants tend to take forever to fucking build relative to other types of power plants. most of them seem to take anywhere between five to ten years to get fully operational even...
also, nuclear power plants tend to take forever to fucking build relative to other types of power plants. most of them seem to take anywhere between five to ten years to get fully operational even without controversies, and the time it takes to build one hasn't really gone down since they became significant players in power production.
But the CO2 is the whole issue! Also, I'd posit that nuclear waste is much more manageable, even before you take into account reprocessing, just because it's all easily contained solids or...
They are cheaper, the waste is more manageable (minus the CO2), and the U.S has a relatively endless supply of it.
But the CO2 is the whole issue! Also, I'd posit that nuclear waste is much more manageable, even before you take into account reprocessing, just because it's all easily contained solids or liquids, and there isn't a lot of it. If 100% of global electricity was generated with nuclear power, you'd only see about 100,000 tons of waste annually. Sounds like a lot, but it's a percent of a percent of a percent of global carbon emissions, it's produced already fully contained, and could all be stored in a single facility if need be. There's also next generation reactors coming along that can burn high level waste as fuel, but you don't even need those to make nuclear power less wasteful and polluting than fossil fuels. Honestly, with the sheer number of batteries you'd need to produce to make wind and ground based solar viable for base load, I wouldn't be surprised if nuclear ended up being greener than them too.
Heavily enough to get us back above the "fusion never" line? It's been quite a while since I looked at it properly, but things didn't seem especially promising in terms of timelines when I did.
Heavily enough to get us back above the "fusion never" line? It's been quite a while since I looked at it properly, but things didn't seem especially promising in terms of timelines when I did.
It's not for nothing they say that fusion has been 15 years away for the last 30 years. I honestly believe fusion could change the world perhaps more than any breakthrough other than general AI,...
It's not for nothing they say that fusion has been 15 years away for the last 30 years. I honestly believe fusion could change the world perhaps more than any breakthrough other than general AI, and with much less risk than the latter. I really, desperately want it to happen. But unfortunately I read about that same Lockheed prototype being 5 years out almost exactly 5 years ago.
Maybe climate change and the cabal of tech billionaires we've got now are the push it needs - I hope they are, but I've learned to stop holding my breath!
I was under the impression that, with utility companies doing energy buybacks from homes and businesses who use solar/wind power, it had become less about not having an even, consistent...
I was under the impression that, with utility companies doing energy buybacks from homes and businesses who use solar/wind power, it had become less about not having an even, consistent distribution of energy but more about the inability of our ancient, crumbling power grid to handle it all?
The problem is that there are transmission losses the further you need to send electricity. That's not saying a more robust electrical grid wouldn't be a good thing.
The problem is that there are transmission losses the further you need to send electricity.
That's not saying a more robust electrical grid wouldn't be a good thing.
extremely annoying that we happen to have the literal worst administration possible at this particular moment to seize this opportunity and that they cannot be out of power until at least january,...
Around three-quarters of US coal production is now more expensive than solar and wind energy in providing electricity to American households, according to a new study.
“Even without major policy shift we will continue to see coal retire pretty rapidly,” said Mike O’Boyle, the co-author of the report for Energy Innovation, a renewables analysis firm. “Our analysis shows that we can move a lot faster to replace coal with wind and solar. The fact that so much coal could be retired right now shows we are off the pace.”
extremely annoying that we happen to have the literal worst administration possible at this particular moment to seize this opportunity and that they cannot be out of power until at least january, 2021, but still quite encouraging since not everything is dependent on the federal government. maybe having this on record will help make a dent in these awful projections by the energy information administration.
Woo!
Unfortunately, this does not necessarily mean that we won't be running fossil fuel power plants in the future, since renewable energy sources tend to release energy in uneven bursts that don't match with demand. But it does mean that meaningful changes are going to be made in the near future.
also, nuclear power plants tend to take forever to fucking build relative to other types of power plants. most of them seem to take anywhere between five to ten years to get fully operational even without controversies, and the time it takes to build one hasn't really gone down since they became significant players in power production.
But the CO2 is the whole issue! Also, I'd posit that nuclear waste is much more manageable, even before you take into account reprocessing, just because it's all easily contained solids or liquids, and there isn't a lot of it. If 100% of global electricity was generated with nuclear power, you'd only see about 100,000 tons of waste annually. Sounds like a lot, but it's a percent of a percent of a percent of global carbon emissions, it's produced already fully contained, and could all be stored in a single facility if need be. There's also next generation reactors coming along that can burn high level waste as fuel, but you don't even need those to make nuclear power less wasteful and polluting than fossil fuels. Honestly, with the sheer number of batteries you'd need to produce to make wind and ground based solar viable for base load, I wouldn't be surprised if nuclear ended up being greener than them too.
Heavily enough to get us back above the "fusion never" line? It's been quite a while since I looked at it properly, but things didn't seem especially promising in terms of timelines when I did.
It's not for nothing they say that fusion has been 15 years away for the last 30 years. I honestly believe fusion could change the world perhaps more than any breakthrough other than general AI, and with much less risk than the latter. I really, desperately want it to happen. But unfortunately I read about that same Lockheed prototype being 5 years out almost exactly 5 years ago.
Maybe climate change and the cabal of tech billionaires we've got now are the push it needs - I hope they are, but I've learned to stop holding my breath!
I was under the impression that, with utility companies doing energy buybacks from homes and businesses who use solar/wind power, it had become less about not having an even, consistent distribution of energy but more about the inability of our ancient, crumbling power grid to handle it all?
The problem is that there are transmission losses the further you need to send electricity.
That's not saying a more robust electrical grid wouldn't be a good thing.
extremely annoying that we happen to have the literal worst administration possible at this particular moment to seize this opportunity and that they cannot be out of power until at least january, 2021, but still quite encouraging since not everything is dependent on the federal government. maybe having this on record will help make a dent in these awful projections by the energy information administration.