Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

For the first time in the U.S., renewables generate more power than natural gas

e360.yale.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 183 posts

Re: For the first time in the U.S., renewables generate more power than natural gas

#31

Post by energy123 »

nradov wrote: post #12
bluGill wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nuclear is not useful today. It is too slow to change output as load changes. We need to focus on storage for all the excess power renewables give at the best case, shifting that to worst case-

If we want to have an industrial economy with 24×7 heavy manufacturing then we need nuclear power for the base load. There's no need to change output much. The amount of batteries needed to keep a huge factory running is ridiculous.

The world's biggest industrial economy, China, installed about 300x more renewable energy than nuclear last year. New nuclear sucks, and baseload is a false concept that can (and is) being synthetically replicated with over-building + storage + transmission + peaking.

Re: For the first time in the U.S., renewables generate more power than natural gas

#32

Post by pydry »

nradov wrote: post #12
bluGill wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nuclear is not useful today. It is too slow to change output as load changes. We need to focus on storage for all the excess power renewables give at the best case, shifting that to worst case-

If we want to have an industrial economy with 24×7 heavy manufacturing then we need nuclear power for the base load. There's no need to change output much. The amount of batteries needed to keep a huge factory running is ridiculous.

The cost of nuclear power is absurd. It's 5x the cost of solar and wind.

If you use electricity to synthesize gas and then burn that later to generate electricity that is still cheaper than nuclear power.

https://theecologist.org/2016/feb/17/wind-power-windgas-chea...

Nobody builds nuclear power because it's cost effective or green. They either have nukes like China or have purchased an option on nukes (like Iran or Poland).

Re: For the first time in the U.S., renewables generate more power than natural gas

#33

Post by gpm »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #30
mchusma wrote: post #3

I do think the Iran crisis should continue to push countries towards nuclear + solar. Like Ukraine helped shift some in Europe back to supporting nuclear after foolishly shutting down reactors.

The flush of $$ to North American oil companies will unfortunately lead to a pile of investment in more oil and gas exploration, refining, and transport. Seeing that already here in Canada. All parties (except one) seem united in their newfound aspiration to just mine and ship more of the stuff. Talking about transition is politically toxic here right now.

The shift in Canada predates the oil crisis the US just created... it dates back to at least the election a year ago.

I strongly suspect it was primarily created by the US threatening to annex us via "economic force" and thus creating a need to prioritize our short term economic strength over longer term charity things like climate change.

Re: For the first time in the U.S., renewables generate more power than natural gas

#34

Post by burningChrome »

RealityVoid wrote: post #17
nsxwolf wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we actually cared about making nuclear cheap - getting rid of the political barriers to building Gen IV reactors, not throwing away our “waste”, it would beat the pants off solar by operating 24/7 and not using up all our land.

While I am a big fan of nuclear, I think the issue of land usage for solar is overblown. We use a lot of land for far less useful things. In the end, anything that helps us burn less fossil fuels, I am happy with.

You're also taking away farmland that could be used to produce all kinds of things. Most of the prime solar areas are the same prime areas for agriculture. By creating massive solar farms, you're at the same time, reducing acreage that could be used for range animals and other agriculture:

Modeling by the American Farmland Trust (AFT) finds that 83% of projected solar development will be on agricultural land, of which 49% will be on land AFT deems “nationally significant” due to high levels of productivity, versatility, and resiliency. In May 2024, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Economic Research Service (ERS) reported that between 2009 and 2020, 43% of solar installations were on land previously used for crop production and 21% on land used as pasture or rangeland.

In a few years we'll have to deal with an impending disposal issue on farmland:

Forecasts suggest that 8 million metric tons of solar panels will have reached the end of their lifecycles by 2030. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory reports that less than 10% of decommissioned panels are recycled. Many end up in landfills at the end of their lifecycle, which could be problematic, according to researchers with the Electric Power Research Institute because panels could break and leak toxic materials like lead and cadmium into the soil. If decommissioned panels are not disposed of properly, they could contaminate the surface and groundwater in the surrounding area, making disposal a major issue for farmers and rural communities who rely on groundwater for needs ranging from crop irrigation to drinking water.

Re: For the first time in the U.S., renewables generate more power than natural gas

#35

Post by senko »

contubernio wrote: post #29
mchusma wrote: post #3

I do think the Iran crisis should continue to push countries towards nuclear + solar. Like Ukraine helped shift some in Europe back to supporting nuclear after foolishly shutting down reactors.

The wars in Ukraine and irán have also highlighted what a horrendous insecurity nuclear power plants are. A direct missile attack on one could be catastrophic. The idea that such will never happen is as silly as the idea that there will never be an accident or a tsunami. But passive safety won't stop a missile.

> what a horrendous insecurity nuclear power plants are. A direct missile attack on one could be catastrophic

The same holds for hydro. Even worse, there would be no time for evacuation. Yet nobody is considering banning dams.

Re: For the first time in the U.S., renewables generate more power than natural gas

#36

Post by WastedCucumber »

colechristensen wrote: post #22
itopaloglu83 wrote: post #9

I wonder how good it could be if the governments offered the exact same amount of subsidies to renewable energy they offer to coal and petroleum, including indirect subsidies like distribution infrastructure etc.

Can we stop with this? It's not a helpful line of thinking or a useful argument. This is the batman vs. superman argument of children at a comic convention. Arguing whether federal highway funding factors in to the cost of coal is absurdly useless. "I wonder how good it could be" It's already here, solar is already dramatically cheaper and has none of the risk profile a global energy market produces. You install sola…

It doesn't seem like a silly argument to me, and certainly not moralizing. Rather "I wonder..." seems to be an indirectly phrased request for information, an open invitation for somebody who has seen the numbers to provide a link.

But I do think I get your point - the subsidies are there so we should compare the costs as they are.

Re: For the first time in the U.S., renewables generate more power than natural gas

#37

Post by KaiserPro »

bluGill wrote: post #7
mchusma wrote: post #3

I do think the Iran crisis should continue to push countries towards nuclear + solar. Like Ukraine helped shift some in Europe back to supporting nuclear after foolishly shutting down reactors.

nuclear is not useful today. It is too slow to change output as load changes. We need to focus on storage for all the excess power renewables give at the best case, shifting that to worst case-

> It is too slow to change output as load changes.

its really not. The new(ie 90s) french reactors are about as fast as Combined cycle gas turbines. Even if its not, it works well enough, spain has shit all battery capacity and manages well enough

but if you have lots of renewables you need batteries ideally, which means the hypothetical argument of "its too slow" goes away because batteries are there to even out the supply.

Re: For the first time in the U.S., renewables generate more power than natural gas

#38

Post by downrightmike »

contubernio wrote: post #29
mchusma wrote: post #3

I do think the Iran crisis should continue to push countries towards nuclear + solar. Like Ukraine helped shift some in Europe back to supporting nuclear after foolishly shutting down reactors.

The wars in Ukraine and irán have also highlighted what a horrendous insecurity nuclear power plants are. A direct missile attack on one could be catastrophic. The idea that such will never happen is as silly as the idea that there will never be an accident or a tsunami. But passive safety won't stop a missile.

That's why we have MADD

Re: For the first time in the U.S., renewables generate more power than natural gas

#39

Post by downrightmike »

gpm wrote: post #33
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The flush of $$ to North American oil companies will unfortunately lead to a pile of investment in more oil and gas exploration, refining, and transport. Seeing that already here in Canada. All parties (except one) seem united in their newfound aspiration to just mine and ship more of the stuff. Talking about transition is politically toxic here right now.

The shift in Canada predates the oil crisis the US just created... it dates back to at least the election a year ago. I strongly suspect it was primarily created by the US threatening to annex us via "economic force" and thus creating a need to prioritize our short term economic strength over longer term charity things like climate change.

Plus if Canada warms up, hey win win

Re: For the first time in the U.S., renewables generate more power than natural gas

#40

Post by downrightmike »

burningChrome wrote: post #34
RealityVoid wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I am a big fan of nuclear, I think the issue of land usage for solar is overblown. We use a lot of land for far less useful things. In the end, anything that helps us burn less fossil fuels, I am happy with.

You're also taking away farmland that could be used to produce all kinds of things. Most of the prime solar areas are the same prime areas for agriculture. By creating massive solar farms, you're at the same time, reducing acreage that could be used for range animals and other agriculture: Modeling by the American Farmland Trust (AFT) finds that 83% of projected solar development will be on agricultural land, of whic…

You can do both farming and solar on the same land and it improves crop yields. As of yesterday, studies found it creates rainfall in the desert
Post reply on HN