derek
@derek
Why is nuclear becoming the energy darling when solar is so clearly better? Solar is already proven to work at a variety of scales, has little-to-no downside, and needs to only become more efficient and ubiquitous.
7 replies
0 recast
11 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Base load. Batteries not there yet to solve for intermittency.
2 replies
1 recast
13 reactions
π _π£π _π
@m-j-r
batteries are not critically necessary for energy storage.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
How do you run stuff at night?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
π _π£π _π
@m-j-r
reclaim potential energy. that's why so much of the grid has to bleed, at scale, into hydropower. if someone could wave a magic wand instead, they'd choose fuel over batteries. @askgina.eth please criticize this
2 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Environmental review laws and nimby wonβt let that happen in practice.
2 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
derek
@derek
Honestly, same argument applies to most renewable energy sources in any form. Regulation and mindset have to change for sure. I canβt imagine a bunch of folks want a reactor in their backyard either.
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
The difference is 20% of existing US power generation is nuclear and you could double the reactor capacity at existing plants without affecting new NIMBYs
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
π _π£π _π
@m-j-r
no, and personally, I think all nuclear should be RTGs for capturing as much delta-v budget as possible, not for capital-intensive, terrestrial power plants. solar is straightforward & simple. any NIMBY resistance to that should be pushed back as much as possible. otherwise, we're mired in hypocrisy and austerity.
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
