Can you clarify? I thought the idea was to run nuclear 24/7 to provide a steady, base rate of power while solar and wind provide complementary power that can be quickly ramped up or down.
If you need something to supply power when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing, you need it to supply peak power needs, not base power needs. And if nuclear can supply peak power needs, then you might as well just have a grid that is 100% nuclear.
If nuclear can't supply peak power needs, then you need batteries or something else to do that. And if you're using batteries, it's a lot cheaper to charge them with solar than with nuclear.
France has been doing this for a long time and balances the unreliable loads of the solar and wind productions from Spain and Germany using pilotable nuclear production.
https://www.rte-france.com/en/eco2mix
If just running nuclear power plants 24/7 is cheaper than running Solar/Wind when the weather is perfect and backup/storage when not, then why should we scale solar/wind up that much to begin with?
bryanlarsen|8 months ago
If nuclear can't supply peak power needs, then you need batteries or something else to do that. And if you're using batteries, it's a lot cheaper to charge them with solar than with nuclear.
Saline9515|8 months ago
preisschild|8 months ago
If just running nuclear power plants 24/7 is cheaper than running Solar/Wind when the weather is perfect and backup/storage when not, then why should we scale solar/wind up that much to begin with?