View Single Post
Old 05-30-2019, 12:55 PM   #5901 (permalink)
redpoint5
Human Environmentalist
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,456

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 24.19 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - CBR600 - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - Dodge/Cummins - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Mazda CX-5 - '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring
90 day: 26.68 mpg (US)

Chevy ZR-2 - '03 Chevrolet S10 ZR2
90 day: 17.14 mpg (US)

Model Y - '24 Tesla Y LR AWD
Thanks: 4,211
Thanked 4,390 Times in 3,364 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard View Post
That alone, proves my point, that nuclear power is much less dependable than renewable energy. And I have read experts, who state the same thing.
Wind on average shuts down several times daily, and if not shut down, operates at diminished capacity for long periods of time. Solar shuts down a minimum of once per day, and too suffers from diminished capacity depending on weather.

A few examples of plants shutting down is not indicative of a systemic problem. If it were a serious problem, we would see nuclear power diminishing rather than growing faster than solar/wind. We would also see lower capacity factors rather than the very steady 80%+ over the past 2 decades.

Wind capacity factor may be improving, but that has more to do with it being very poor to begin with ~30%.

It's silly to imply that what we need to implement today is technology we hope will be developed in the future. We can only implement what is available today while still hoping for improvements in the future. To say that RE storage might be technically feasible and cost effective in the future doesn't give us direction on what to build now.

__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
 
The Following User Says Thank You to redpoint5 For This Useful Post:
aerohead (06-01-2019)