> You do realize that it’s quite telling that you still haven’t been able to point out a single of these ”falsehoods” nor been able to provide any factual information of your own?

Brandolini's law. And I'm not going to spend any effort with someone who use "sources" they haven't even read…

> Why are you so afraid of renewables and storage?

I'm not afraid of them. I'm afraid of people making wrong decisions based on idealistic views of technologies.

Renewable (outside of hydro) are a very good complement to fossil fuels. And they are a key tool to half emissions from electricity production in most of the world where electricity production is mostly done through fossil fuels. And that's great.

But also that's it. They aren't going to carry the grid on their own, they aren't going to cure cancer or bring world peace.

▲

ViewTrick1002 6 hours ago | parent [-]

I have read all the sources I linked. Well, to be perfectly honest, for the ENTSO-E final report I read the summary and the relevant sections and for the actual FERC regulation, rather than the news posts I used to find the true root source, I left it at the introduction which says "non-synchronous sources must provide reactive power as per this technical specification from Y date".

But that's of course not good enough.

But you know that I am right, which is why you're trying to avoid facing reality and pretending everything I say is false, rather than dare to face it.

The consensus among grid operators and researchers is that renewable grids are a solved problem. They’ve moved on to the implementation details instead. Reddit is firmly stuck in the past though.

But, if you are curious, the modeling lands on a combination of this depending on local circumstances:

- Wind, overbuilt

- Solar, overbuilt

- Demand response

- Long range transmission to smooth out variability

- Existing nuclear power (for the grids that have them)

- Exising hydro

- Storage

- In places with district heating: CHP plants running on carbon neutral fuels.

- An emergency reserve of gas turbines. Run them on carbon neutral fuel if their emissions matter.

Why do you want to waste tens of billions of euros on handouts per new built large scale reactor?

▲

littlestymaar 4 hours ago | parent [-]

> I have read all the sources I linked.

“I've spent 5 hours reading official materials before responding to a comment on HN”, yeah, sure.

> The consensus among grid operators and researchers is that renewable grids are a solved problem.

The consensus is that you have no understanding of the topic.

I recently followed this [cycle of conferences on the future of electricity grids]( https://www.college-de-france.fr/fr/agenda/seminaire/la-tran...) and the researchers's opinion is the litteral opposite of what you've just said.

Who should I believe, the professional or the HN crank using perplexity. Though question …

	▲	ViewTrick1002 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Love it. Keep ducking. Why are you so afraid? You still haven't pointed out a single falsehood. Then you go link a seminar from unknown people in French as your source. But I get it. You Frenchies truly are in the shit. The new Greece of Europe economically with a spiraling debt being completely unable to reign it in. With a crumbling nuclear fleet you are unable to replace in time. Which renewables are already cratering the earning potential for. The perfect solution to that of course is an absolutely stupidly large handout to new built nuclear power! So go ahead. Link some internationally credible research telling me how wrong I am. You still haven't been able to do it, which is extremely telling,