logoalt Hacker News

recursive • yesterday at 4:00 PM • 2 replies • view on HN

If it displaces fossil generation, it's still a big win.


Replies

crote • yesterday at 5:27 PM

It won't.

The main problem with solar and wind is that they can't be dispatched on demand. The power is incredibly cheap, but you are completely at the mercy of the weather.

What is needed is a source of power which can make up for the freak moments where 1) there isn't any sun, and 2) there isn't any wind, and 3) it lasts long enough that batteries can't cover it, and 4) it has to be widespread enough that you can't make up for it with power from half a continent away.

This power source will only need to be used for a few hundred hours per year but it'll need to carry a significant load, so while its per-MWh running costs are basically irrelevant its one-time per-MW construction costs should be fairly low.

This does not at all describe nuclear power, which has incredibly high construction costs, near-zero running costs, and is expected to run 24/7/365 at 100%.

➕ show 1 reply
khalic • yesterday at 4:02 PM

New projects are decades from completion given the size of the any reactor, modular is unproven. We need clean power right now, actually 20 years ago

➕ show 2 replies