Iran war energy shock sparks global push to reduce fossil fuel dependence

But as far as I know this is a non issue since we 've mostly been able to cover this where it props up. Especially since the grid's demand doesn't tend to go 0-100 or the other way around that fast. Even with a significant amount of nuclear there's multiple of those solar farms, wind farms, etc

For the small fluctuations the turbine's governor response can provide frequency stabilization and pressurised water reactors also provide moderate load following.

>The other aspect is the economics of nuclear itself. Nuclear power plants are the most capital intensive generation capacity you can build. Even when driving them at the maximum of their rated capacity, the have a levelized cost of electricity several times that of PV and Wind per kwh.

When I looked at actually honest comparisons this simply isn't true across the board. I mean it doesn't help that the west has built so few recently and managed some exceptional fuckups whilst also making a lightbulb in an unimportant sidebuildings toilet cost a couple dozen grand in a way that might as well be purposefull sabotage of nuclear but much of the world (read mostly china) does relatively fine with their costs and time frame. These comparisons also have a tendency to use absolutely unrealistic storage costs all the same or foresee continued storage costs of methods that are exhausted. (hydro over here) Additionally it's the cheapest solar that often pulls this down but the vast majority in let's say here in Belgium is residential which is a lot lot more costly and less efficient. The solar farms are all way more south so a lot of these american reports don't make much sense in most of europe either.

You’re right, they don’t reduce grid costs.

They massively increase it.

We wouldn’t need much in the way of new grid infrastructure if new generation capacity was primarily combined cycle gas turbines, coal, and nuclear power plants, because these can largely be upgrades to existing generation sites.

And even where they are greenfields in new locations, gas / coal / nuclear are incredibly energy dense compared with wind or solar, thereby requiring less new high voltage transmission / distribution infrastructure.

Fact: Australia is happy to sell our gas a coal and uranium for the world to use. Why is it okay for others to burn our cheap coal, but not us? It’s the same atmosphere.