Nuclear energy is more expensive than renewables, CSIRO report finds

And this is why power companies worldwide sat up and took notice of Hornsdale in SA. But they’re a huge possibilities that have only begun to be explored. The USA has a massive opportunity to develop more geothermal. Problem is geothermal is expensive to set up so the cheap arse companies won’t spend the money.

 

I think this belongs here.

https://iub.iowa.gov/press-release/...utilities-2023-2024-winter-preparedness-plans

 

You switched to consumption in post #189.

Iowa is doing fine with both transportation and industry.

You're stating prognostications that you are not documenting.

 

The rational cheap arse customers (maybe you don't have those in Australia) that these companies serve really don't want to spend more every month for electricity.

 

Serious question, I'm not trying to be a smart arse. I really don't know.

What does "load shedding" mean? Do they mean turning some customers off or reducing their power supply.

 

Thing is the production costs once set up are lower than say coal and nuclear but because they can ramp up electrify production easily they become backups in the system. Wind doesn’t blow - pour more geothermal power into the system. You use battery arrays to “smooth” out the transitions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_energy_in_the_United_States

This is where governments come in and apparently have - USA is about to inject more geothermal based electricity into the system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_electricity

 

I don't see a relevant point here.

What I said is that EV demand isn't being driven by federal or state emission measures.

 

Why? Every state should assure they have the utilities needed for extreme conditions of various kinds.

Texas needed to do that sometime prior to Feb 2021, right?

It's good to see that Iowa is trying to be on top of that.

 

It has been my point all along that intermittent solar and wind require fossil or nuclear back-up.

 

And, you think so improvements have been made to the system since 1989?

 

The cost of that coal back-up must be included in the cost of Iowa energy.

 

???? Do you know what a Carrington event is?

 

And coal is more expensive. But load shedding nas been a thing for decades now and can be worse in heat waves

 

Load shedding is a consequence of inadequate generating capacity.

 

At the moment. And this is factored into things like the Paris Agreement - which I am betting you have not read. The argument that “green energy cannot cope with every contingent” is a straw-man argument because even the IPCC does not recommend 10l% renewables tomorrow. We will get there but there is more infrastructure to be put in place first. Green hydrogen and ammonia are about to come on board but it will take a few years

 

Which has been a problem for many many years now

 

The load is the customer.

There's two things the power company has to regulate, voltage and frequency. The demand you make on the grid is current at a specific voltage + or - 10%. If the demand on the grid exceeds the ability of the supply to produce the current the voltage in the grid will drop. This can cause an even greater demand on current. It will also mess with the phase of voltage and current which will drop the frequency. If the power company can't immediately increase current supply their only recourse is to cut off portions of the grid. This is load shedding. It's an intentional shut off.

 

That coal production was already present. It was NOT added due to wind being added.

Other than that, you aren't making a clear argument here.

 

That is a separate issue - NOT an issue of whether wind production in the US is less expensive OR whether 2/3 renewable energy is unsustainable.

For example, the conservative state of Iowa is expanding wind production according to the EIA.

 

You have to make that argument in the context of real world conditions.

That's why Iowa is important.

 

No claim that renewables are cheapest ever includes the cost of fossil or nuclear back-up.

 

Correlated to the introduction of renewable energy and cut-backs on fossil and nuclear energy production.

 

No claim that renewables are cheapest ever includes the cost of fossil or nuclear back-up.

 

Yes they are. The Federal government is doing everything it can to pump EVs. That includes subsidies (both to consumers and as part of EPA phase-ins) and an open ban of ICE engines by EPA to be completed by 2035.

Oh no. EVs current popularity has nothing to do with their inherent market strength.

And when the government's ability to do that vanishes, EVs become complicated bricks.

 

Irrelevant.