re: Wind Power Production Drops Despite 6.2GW of Added Capacity

quote:

---

Cant be by itself... if they went full out starting today to get a nuclear plant online, you're talking 2040 before it putting energy on the grid, prob at a cost of 30-50 billion

---

Robert Bryce (the writer from the OP article) is a big proponent of what he calls natural gas to nuclear (N2N). That actually would reduce emissions and help build baseload on our grid.

quote:

---

Is the industry perfect? No. But you're being completely disingenuous by not pointing equal blame to our failing grid infrastructure that can't handle the power.

---

I’m absolutely aware our infrastructure is in an awful state. I’m helping merely point out that money is being invested in the wrong areas. If massive amounts of capital are going to wind projects instead of building out transmission or new baseload power generation, it is a massive waste.

Wind and solar having low energy density requires them to be built out in open spaces requiring many acres of land. A nat gas or nuclear power plant can be plopped right next to a city on a smaller piece of land. You have fewer losses by the transmission being a shorter distance and you have less voltage drop for the power over that distance.

Not sure if you were stating an opinion either way but our infrastructure definitely sucks. It’s suffered from lack of investment for decades.