dnewton3
Staff member
The duck curve shows why this fetish with renewable solar/wind energy is a sideline distraction, still to this day. And, this duck curve isn't a surprise to those who understand grid energy systems; this effect was predicted when solar/wind were being foisted at the beginning.
The two things I see wrong as a result of this phenomenon are:
- massive need for storage systems (batteries). These storage systems eat into the efficiency of the system, because storing and retrieving electrical energy is not anywhere near as efficient as direct on-demand use. So there needs to be an honest conversation about how this concept of "storing" electrical energy is going to affect overall system costs; cost of batteries AND cost of lost power in moving energy around from generation to storage to use
- serious concerns for yet-to-be-experienced hazardous waste; if you have massive battery storage systems, someday you're going to have massive hazardous waste issues to deal with. While recycling can address some of this, it most certainly does not address all of it. AND ... let's not forget the huge negative environmental impact of mining/producing which these battery storage systems create.
I admit that small generation/storage systems can make sense when you live off grid; people in remote areas can really benefit from the local generation and storage of electricity because the alternative is essentially having nothing. But that's not the conversation we're having here. We're talking about mass grid systems and relying on solar/wind for societal daily living, manufacturing, etc.
When will we wise up and realize that nuclear power is the most efficient, cleanest, best-balanced alternative for fossil fuels? It's not perfect, but it's way better than any other choice out there. Our social stigmas bias us against the most practical path forward.
.
The two things I see wrong as a result of this phenomenon are:
- massive need for storage systems (batteries). These storage systems eat into the efficiency of the system, because storing and retrieving electrical energy is not anywhere near as efficient as direct on-demand use. So there needs to be an honest conversation about how this concept of "storing" electrical energy is going to affect overall system costs; cost of batteries AND cost of lost power in moving energy around from generation to storage to use
- serious concerns for yet-to-be-experienced hazardous waste; if you have massive battery storage systems, someday you're going to have massive hazardous waste issues to deal with. While recycling can address some of this, it most certainly does not address all of it. AND ... let's not forget the huge negative environmental impact of mining/producing which these battery storage systems create.
I admit that small generation/storage systems can make sense when you live off grid; people in remote areas can really benefit from the local generation and storage of electricity because the alternative is essentially having nothing. But that's not the conversation we're having here. We're talking about mass grid systems and relying on solar/wind for societal daily living, manufacturing, etc.
When will we wise up and realize that nuclear power is the most efficient, cleanest, best-balanced alternative for fossil fuels? It's not perfect, but it's way better than any other choice out there. Our social stigmas bias us against the most practical path forward.
.
Last edited: