Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Sweden did spent similar amounts for ren subsidies over years, that's why I'm not sure it's the biggest. If the goal is 1.5gw nuclear, that would be about 20bn for bwrx if fully funded by govt, looking at Canada. 20bn is a lot, but on the other hand Sweden for sure did spent similar amounts for ren over years.

renewables cover different aspect of demand. What you do if you don't have enough firming power? Hope neighbors will have spare power? That's why you start planning nuclear now, or you'll start planning gas later, just like Germany





Please stop guessing and making stuff up?

Anti subsidy reports in 2019 [1] landed on a what was seen as a worryingly large €10B for the entire Swedish market based subsidy system over the period from 2003 to 2045. 2018 the actual costs landed on €300m.

In 2021 the price of the system went to zero and was subsequently phased out for new producers. You know; market based subsidies.

In other words, much less than €10B will ever be spent on it.

Please stop making stuff up because you can’t bring yourself to accept how horrifyingly expensive new built nuclear power is.

Are suggesting that we should build peaking nuclear power plants to solve firming? Because that is Sweden’s problem. Managing a January cold spell coupled with low wind is what is used to calculate the resiliency.

What capsize factor should we calculate? 20%? That is way higher than a January cold spell but let’s go for it.

Running Vogtle at a 20% capacity factor leads to 80 cents per kWh electricity.

What you are suggesting is completely batshit insane when actually putting a number on it.

Who cares if the final bit of firming is fossil based with possibility to be decarbonized through synfuels, biofuels or hydrogen when we still have large portions of the economy to deal with?

Don’t let imaginary perfect be the enemy of good enough.

[1]: https://timbro.se/miljo/ny-rapport-subventioner-till-fornyba...


I'm suggesting phasing out fossils including gas firming.

Hydrogen firming is extremely expensive per Lazard, it's strange you are bringing it up while complaining about nuclear. Needless to say their numbers are for US. For europe it'll be more similar to Germany https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/shipping-green-hydrogen... https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/eu-report-says-making-g...

Nuclear can achieve this and you can reform capacity market to guarantee 60%cf if you need, because you know, you still need firming power and maybe you want to avoid too high transmission expansion and grid forming inverters.

If ren strategy alone can't achieve this due to gas firming, then you deploy less ren. Sweden can expand ren as long as hydro can firm it. Past that, you don't have other realistic option than nuclear if you want to phase out fossils entirely


It seems like you are looking at this from a binary stance.

Willing to waste 10x as much resources and money because 99% is not 100% even though we still need to decarbonize shipping, aviation, agriculture and industry. Laser focused on one sector ignoring all else.

That sounds like a juvenile position coming from an ideologist rather than someone vying for the quickest possible decarbonization of our entire society.

I’m not sure why you latched on to hydrogen? Maybe because that is the one you could hope to ”debunk”?

We of course also have biofuels, the ethanol blend in for US gasoline is enough to run the entire grid without help for 16 days.

Just repurpose that, while ensuring the inputs also decarbonize, as we switch our transportation fleet to BEVs.

This does not have to be solved today, it is a problem for the 2030s so let’s not jump ahead of ourselves when Poland still runs 70% on fossil fuels.

What you are saying is that we should force the market to build nuclear power despite the insane cost through subsidies. Vogtle running at 60% is still a completely insane 30 cents per kWh excluding transmission costs.

Please do explain what is scary with grid forming inverters? In the latest Chinese auctions the lots with grid forming inverters added ~$20/kWh to the storage price.

And then you circle back to the completely binary world. You do know that Sweden has a huge oil power plant running a few hours per year in a capacity reserve? It just never gets called in due to not being needed.

With your logic nothing is worth doing until that power plant is entirely phased out even though it runs for a fraction of a percent per year?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: