Being able to harness the power of atoms is cool, but directly harnessing the power of a star is arguably far cooler.
GissaMittJobb
joined 2 years ago
A scenario where you get zero production for a week is very unlikely - broadly speaking, you cope with this by building out production to produce a massive surplus, with various industries that can at variable rates use up the massive amounts of cheap power in the base case, then you build up storage to cope with the most likely scenarios of capacity reduction/smoothing out the price curve throughout the day.
It's also important to note that demand is far from static - people can and will reduce their usage when incentivized to do so, usually in the form of raising prices in low capacity scenarios. It's already starting to become quite popular to do so today, with spot price electricity plans allowing people to pay ridiculously low rates by aligning their energy usage with capacity availability - things like charging EVs/running laundry/running dishwashers/storing up thermal energy.
Their cost goes up over time while the cost of both renewables and energy storage is plummeting.
No, we have viable energy storage solutions already. We haven't built them out, but they are already feasible. And the best part about them is that they get more feasible each year, while nuclear becomes less and less feasible each year.
Assuming that you start today, by the time the first nuclear plant comes online, it will be so wildly uncompetitive that only huge amounts of subsidies will be able to keep it running.
Closing down existing nuclear was a mistake, and there's probably an argument to be made that scaling back on its construction and R&D was also a mistake. But trying to go back to nuclear at this point when renewables and storage are so obviously taking over is a larger mistake.
People on Lemmy are suffering from a serious case of BEC and this thread is clear evidence of this guy being a target of it
ffmpeg is wild as far as tools go
Beginning investments nuclear at this point when renewables so obviously to everyone in the know are beating them on all accounts is extremely on brand for someone as dumb as Trump
Spill the beans
Basically it doesn't produce heat by converting energy into heat, rather, it uses energy to move heat from one place to another. Hence the name heat pump - it literally just pumps heat around. The place where it gets the heat in this case is the outside. While it's usually colder than inside at the times when you'd want to use a heat pump for heating, it's still way more than absolute zero - the freezing point of water is 273 Kelvin, after all. This means there's always some amount of heat that you can 'steal' from the outside and pump indoors.
You may infer that this means that the heat pump is going to be pumping colder air outside, and you'd be correct in that inference. What's even more interesting is the realization that you can harness that property by running the heat pump 'in reverse' to cool a space - which is exactly what an air conditioner does. It's merely a heat pump that pumps the heat out of a space.
Here's a Technology Connections video explaining the concept even better than I could: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7J52mDjZzto
A damn shame that he's an anti-vaxxer. A damn shame.
Given their vastly higher energy efficiency, they still reduce emissions even if running on fossil fuels by a significant amount.
Feel free to re-imagine the energy system as a socialist one where you merely replace the concept of a monetary cost with a resource cost. You still want things to use less resources, because then you can have more of it, which ultimately benefits the public that aims to use the energy.