• JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    What about when the grid is almost entirely renewables? Is nuclear cheaper than just storage? What about storage one it’s already been implemented to the point of resource scarcity?

    • zik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No, nuclear is always more expensive in real world conditions. Places with mostly renewables plus in-fill from batteries and transient gas generation are a lot cheaper than nuclear. eg. South Australia.

    • schroedingershat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      1kg of lithium produces about 10kWh of storage for 15-20 years. 3-12 hours of storage is plenty for a >95% VRE grid.

      1kg of uranium produces about 750W for 6 years.

      There are about 20 million tonnes of conventional lithium economically accessible reserves (and it has only been of economic interest for a short time).

      There are about 10 million tonnes of reasonably assured accessible uranium (not reserves, stuff assumed to exist). It has had many boom/bust cycles of prospecting.

      Lithium batteries are not even being proposed as the main grid storage method.

        • schroedingershat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Cobalt isn’t even in most EV batteries anymore, and LMFP is replacing NMC next year.

          Sodium ion will then replace LFP the year after.

          It’s also real weird how people only ever care about french colonial exploitation of africa when it comes to materials they pretend are in renewables and not when they’re flooding villages drinking water with uranium tailings.