this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2025
322 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

60528 readers
4535 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
322
Fossil Fuel Interests Ramp Up Their “Solar Makes Electricity More Expensive” Falsehood (cleantechnica.com)
submitted 2 weeks ago by ArtikBanana@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/technology@lemmy.world
29 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Is it more expensive than storage? My understanding was that nuclear was cheaper long-term, but I honestly don't know. I think we need both, but I could be convinced that nuclear is obsolete with some real-life numbers.

[–] Womble@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

It's not, to provide 2 weeks of storage (a reasonable amount to cover a period of no wind in winter) for the UK would cost about 2,000 Billion USD at current Li-ion prices.

Intermittent renewables are great as a component of energy generation but storage costs become prohibitive as you get to large fractions of intermittent power generation.