CATL has developed a 6.25 MWH energy storage system called TENER. A utility could invest in 300 of these, along with renewables, and it would cost a fraction of the cost of a 1 GWatt nuclear power plant. And there is no low level radioactive waste that has to be stored for hundreds of thousands of years. This technology has no battery degradation for the first 5 years of operation. https://www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2024/04/catl-unveils-6-25-mwh-energy-storage-system-tener/ TENER has cleared roadblocks for the movement of lithium ions and achieved zero degradation for both power and capacity, ensuring zero growth of auxiliary power consumption throughout full life cycle, thereby creating “ageless” energy storage system, the company claims. CATL along with Tesla, are the two most advanced large scale power battery storage companies in the world.
In theory but it would take a lot of land and that is not as readily available in some places as others. Nuclear laps solar 20 times as far as production per acre. Our municipal utilities has a 10.5 mwh battery farm online and a few more in the works but it isn't to replace anything as far a generation though we do have a solar farm as well. The practical value of battery farms is that they help level costs during peak demand hours. That is where their value lies. Duke Energy would need greater than 20 square miles to replace its nuclear with solar before it even got to the battery farms. That amount of land would be hard to come by and wouldn't come without its own environmental costs.
Just as QLD has opened two new Vanadium mines and is bringing a vanadium refinery online. Vanadium redox flow batteries have long promised large storage with little degradation
Nuclear is ruddy expensive to build but you are right about the use in levelling both costs and output - that is where SA’s Hornsdale battery makes its money apparently
With a proper grid, Duke Energy could be harvesting power from Western deserts. They could utilize off-shore wind, or other renewable strategies. You realize that all these East Coast and Southeast nuclear plants are storing their low-level wastes, with half-lives of hundreds of thousands of years, on-site at the facility, in the middle of these population centers. They are stored in containment rated for 200 years. Who will continue to maintain this for the other 99,800 years?
You do realize that the western deserts have animals and fauna that would be impacted and all the west coast grid credits aren't going to mean a thing if there is no one actually producing the power when needed where needed? One high transmission line only carries about 1000 megawatts. The eastern US has 180M people. As for the nuclear casts, eventually it will be used in molten salt reactors.
I worked at a Fortune 500 plant on the East Coast, and they covered their entire roof of this huge plant with solar panels. Solar should be going on roofs all over the east coast, and the Southeast even moreso. Appalachia is a prime area for wind energy. So there are other options, and this type of storage system supplements those options. Nuclear Energy reminds me of a game of darts. They just keep throwing darts at different technologies, hoping that one of them sticks. Molten salt reactors are one example. Complexities galore! And expensive - astronomical! https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/advanced-isnt-always-better#read-online-content Molten salt–fueled reactors (MSRs): In contrast to conventional reactors that use fuel in a solid form, these use liquid fuel dissolved in a molten salt at a temperature of at least 650ºC. The fuel, which is pumped through the reactor, also serves as the coolant. MSRs can be either thermal reactors that use a moderator such as graphite or fast reactors without a moderator. All MSRs chemically treat the fuel to varying extents while the reactor operates to remove radio-active isotopes that affect reactor performance. Therefore, unlike other reactors, MSRs generally require on-site chemical plants to process their fuel. MSRs also need elaborate systems to capture and treat large volumes of highly radioactive gaseous byproducts. ... The deployment of NLWRs also would require new industrial facilities and other infrastructure to produce and transport their different types of fuel, as well as to manage spent fuel and other nuclear wastes. These facilities may use new technologies that themselves would require significant R&D. They also may present different risks related to safety, security, and nuclear proliferation than do LWR fuel cycle facilities—important considerations for evaluating the whole system. ... Moreover, the problems of nuclear power cannot be fixed through better reactor design alone. Also critical is the regulatory framework governing the licensing, construction, and operation of nuclear plants and their associated fuel cycle infrastructure. Inadequate licensing standards and oversight activities can compromise the safety of improved designs. A key consideration is the extent to which regulators require extra levels of safety—known as "defense-in-depth"—to compensate for uncertainties in new reactor designs for which there is little or no operating experience.
I mean the technology is impressive and certainly useful, but Rolls Royce (the plane one, not the car one) is coming out with a self contained (zero emissions) reactor approximately the same size that puts out 1-10MW. Micro-Reactor | Rolls-Royce AFAICT, it cant melt down or leak, which are my two main problems with nuclear. Maybe one micro-reactor and a handful of giant batteries would be a good combination- reactor charges the batteries during low use times, batteries suppliment the reactor during high use times, and it all fits on (roughly) a residential sized lot.
Cost is relative to lifespan. Solar panels need to be replaced every 20-30 years. Same with wind turbines. I dunno how long a micro reactor lasts, but if one can power 1000 homes for 30 years, then its worth about $100M at todays energy prices. Tho that is a substantial initial investment...
Yep! And reports suggest it helps wildlife. Think shade in the desert. Many places are erecting the solar panels high enough so sheep and cattle can graze underneath - of course that doesn’t help in goat country
If the solar panels are producing shade what is going to grow underneath them for the sheep and cattle to graze?
Only a very very small fraction of nuclear waste has such decay times Radioactive Waste – Myths and Realities 4. Nuclear waste is hazardous for tens of thousands of years. This clearly is unprecedented and poses a huge threat to our future generations Many industries produce hazardous and toxic waste. All toxic waste needs to be dealt with safely, not just radioactive waste. The radioactivity of nuclear waste naturally decays, and has a finite radiotoxic lifetime. Within a period of 1,000-10,000 years, the radioactivity of HLW decays to that of the originally mined ore. Its hazard then depends on how concentrated it is. By comparison, other industrial wastes (e.g. heavy metals, such as cadmium and mercury) remain hazardous indefinitely. Most nuclear waste produced is hazardous, due to its radioactivity, for only a few tens of years and is routinely disposed of in near-surface disposal facilities (see above). Only a small volume of nuclear waste (~3% of the total) is long-lived and highly radioactive and requires isolation from the environment for many thousands of years. International conventions define what is hazardous in terms of radiation dose, and national regulations limit allowable doses accordingly. Well-developed industry technology ensures that these regulations are met so that any hazardous waste is handled in a way it poses no risk to human health or the environment. Waste is converted into a stable form that is suitable for disposal. In the case of HLW, a multi-barrier approach, combining containment and geological disposal, ensures isolation of the waste from people and the environment for thousands of years. https://world-nuclear.org/informati...s/radioactive-wastes-myths-and-realities.aspx And we citizens are already opposing all these offshore wind farms polluting or overshore waters and the problems they bring including to the fish and mammals who live there.
Duh! What grows in any shade in a desert? I am not saying you will get ten foot growth but you will see a somewhat more verdant area given the reduction in direct light reducing evaporation plus there can be some dew point effects in some areas. However there is modelling suggesting that if we convert 20% of the Sahara to solar we will affect the microclimate - it is speculative and it seems China might have answers soon since they have put in massive solar farms in their desert areas
What happens when a hurricane comes through the Southeast and wipes out all those rooftop solar panels? I already pay a $2000 a year premium just for wind damage on my insurance what happens when there is an additional $30K in solar panels on top? And how much did the taxpayer pay for those solar panels on top of your Fortune 500 plant's solar panels? The Home-Solar Boom Gets a ‘Gut Punch’ Nation’s biggest residential solar market is tanking and installations could decline 13% nationwide, despite clean energy push ...Even as the nation accelerates its push for clean energy, the market for rooftop solar is shrinking, pummeled by high interest rates, tight credit and cuts to solar incentives. ...he amount of solar power U.S. homeowners install could shrink 13% this year, as forecast by the trade group Solar Energy Industries Association and consulting firm Wood Mackenzie. More than a hundred solar contractors have already gone out of business during the past year as demand dried up, ...The decline is led by California, which has some of the country’s most ambitious clean-energy targets and more solar panels on homes than any other state. ...Last year, California implemented new rules that cut the amount of compensation most rooftop solar owners get for the electricity they send to the grid by 75% or more to manage the oversupply and soaring costs for upgrading the grid. ...Residential solar sales have dropped to a quarter of what they were a year ago, and more than a fifth of the state’s solar contractors have been laid off, according to some estimates. ...The state’s utility companies are increasing rates fast as they look for money to bulk up the power grid as well as bolster it against wildfires. Rooftop solar owners weren’t paying enough toward such costs, the companies claim—an argument that many consumer advocates dispute. https://www.wsj.com/business/energy...oom-gets-a-gut-punch-2d6a2947?mod=djem10point
You have any idea how much sheep and cattle eat? And you only get indirect around the edges not in the middle.
I've had pedestal-mounted solar panels for 13 years. I live on the plains of Colorado, and they've survived huge windstorms, hailstorms with baseball-sized hail, and many other weather events. After last summer's hailstorm, roofing companies just went through and replaced every asphalt shingle roof in our area. Not one survived. My metal roof was fine. My solar panels were fine.
Well try that in a 12 hour Cat 4 hurricane. I can post video after video of solar panel farms devastated by weather along with wind turbines, they are by nature exposed to the elements and impossible to protect. As I said with just my asphalt roof I pay a $2000 premium and should say STILL pay that much because after Ivan it was $3600 just for wind damage to the roof thank you environmentalist global warmist chicken littles.
If your home is hit by that kind of hurricane, solar panels will be the last thing you'll be worrying about. I know people who were in Fort Myers last year, with the water up to their roof. Don't think they're too worried about solar panels.
Personally, I think that anybody who installs an asphalt shingle roof is a fool. A metal roof will last a lifetime. We had a hailstorm come through my area. Roofers had to replace every asphalt shingle roof. My metal roof - no problem. Also, my pedestal-mount solar panels - no problem. Put those solar panels on a metal roof - now you have something great!
