[mduerksen]

You could have made the same argument against solar panels 15 years ago.

This is a pioneering product for early adopters - expect prices to go down significantly with economics of scale. And further research in this area is far from exausted.

[tpmx]

I mean, I don't disagree. The problem is that lots of anti-nucluear-fundies are comparing existing nuclear power to hypothetical hydrogen storage - "it's just a matter of research".

My point is: Deploy nuclear power now, continue RND on large scale hydrogen storage that maybe will pan out in 20 years.

[mduerksen]

Yes, I was not proposing such system as a large scale solution for the coming winter. It would be prudent to keep our nuclear reactors running for now.

As always, There is No Silver Bullet™.

Nuclear is not the perfect solution. It cannot be powered on and off on short notice, which would be useful for complementation of solar and wind that have high power output, but also sudden slumps. Ironically, the ideal companion for renewables would be gas...

Lithium batteries could compensate short outages, but don't have enough (feasable) capacity for long seasonal shortages.

Enter Power to Gas. Hydrogen can be a good tool in that area.

A commerically available hydrogen storage system (that is in high demand even despite its price point) will definitely accelerate innovation very effectively. I think this tool will be available quite soon for mere mortals.

[gamblor956]

Nuclear power plants take years to build. Even if a plant were approved today, it wouldn't be finished before large scale hydrogen storage either fails or takes hold, at which point it would be an expensive and unnecessary boondoggle.