| ▲ | raron 3 hours ago | |
Probably it depends on what part of the world you are and on what is your goal, what you want to optimize for. In many countries there are usual systematic weather events where all renewable production goes to basically nothing for few days or even 2 weeks. You can not solve that by improving renewable sources, there isn't enough raw energy they could capture. Storage for that long is currently impossible and even if it would be, it would be prohibitively expensive. So what you can do, build gas or coal plants. Building those, having people on call all the time, and the opportunity cost is probably many times more expensive than the building cost of renewables themselves. And you still need to buy and store fossil fuels, you are still dependent on geopolitical issues, and you still produce a lot of CO2. If your goal is environment protection or reducing climate change, then nuclear is probably better. If your goal is to reduce energy cost then probably renewables + short term battery storage + gas backup is the winner if you use an appropriate electricity pricing model. Nuclear seems to be the old, known, stable thing, while renewables are the new and shiny thing that solves everything cheaply (and that sounds like it has huge catch). When you are building such critical infrastructure as the electrical grid, then staying safe and choosing the known, but expensive solution might seems to be the right choice for many people. | ||