Bill Gates and his energy company are starting construction at their Wyoming site for a next-generation nuclear power plant he believes will “revolutionize” how power is generated.
This is honestly why I enjoy covering what I do. I don’t see it being commercially viable in three decades, let alone more. Better tokamaks are not the answer. There’s still too much input voltage where we’re not getting net output.
That’s the joke, though. Fusion is always 30 years out. I want to see real breakthroughs, and we aren’t there yet with fusion. That said, I’ve not paid a power bill since September, so we have solutions; they just aren’t at utility scale.
Solar attached to homes is not really a scalable solution on its own. For one thing, it’s a massive liability for the utility. Power is produced on an as needed just in time fashion. Putting extra power onto the grid just means that the load is less predictable, and if the utility doesn’t have storage, this extra power could be excess, and there isn’t a convenient and safe way to dump persistent excess power on a grid level, and they can’t phone you up to ask you to shut down your solar arrays either.
This is why you see negative energy prices from time to time. Oversupply is a problem and it can wreck equipment.
Sorry I should have added: I always thought that nuclear had way higher output capacity than other energy options. But I think it’s clear that that is no longer the case, if it ever was.
Thx for jumping in here and sharing your expertise!
This is honestly why I enjoy covering what I do. I don’t see it being commercially viable in three decades, let alone more. Better tokamaks are not the answer. There’s still too much input voltage where we’re not getting net output.
That’s the joke, though. Fusion is always 30 years out. I want to see real breakthroughs, and we aren’t there yet with fusion. That said, I’ve not paid a power bill since September, so we have solutions; they just aren’t at utility scale.
Solar attached to homes is not really a scalable solution on its own. For one thing, it’s a massive liability for the utility. Power is produced on an as needed just in time fashion. Putting extra power onto the grid just means that the load is less predictable, and if the utility doesn’t have storage, this extra power could be excess, and there isn’t a convenient and safe way to dump persistent excess power on a grid level, and they can’t phone you up to ask you to shut down your solar arrays either.
This is why you see negative energy prices from time to time. Oversupply is a problem and it can wreck equipment.
so to your mind, why are PV, wind, and EGS are the preferred solutions to nuclear? Just because they can produce similar output with fewer risks?
I don’t wish to be dismissive, but, uh … yeah. Fewer risks and baseload are kinda the holy grail.
Sorry I should have added: I always thought that nuclear had way higher output capacity than other energy options. But I think it’s clear that that is no longer the case, if it ever was.
Thx for jumping in here and sharing your expertise!