257

Renewable Power Helped the United States Survive the Hottest Summer Ever (cleantechnica.com)

submitted 11 months ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

17 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Renewable Power Helped the United States Survive the Hottest Summer Ever::This summer, the United States endured the two warmest months ever recorded, yet the system held because of renewable energy.

top 17 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 27 points 11 months ago

In Texas, ERCOT issued warning after warning of the possibility of failure due to "unreliable solar and wind generation" while raising rates and asking residents to set their thermostats to 80. Yet they keep investing in renewable energy. If it's so fucking unreliable, why keep adding it to the shitty, delicate Texas grid?

It's almost like conservatives (and their corporate masters) are liars who are incapable of even slight truths.

[-] zoe@infosec.pub 2 points 11 months ago

how about (ol'reliable.jpeg) megapacks? with enough storage and solar capacity to cover surge consumption ?

[-] Cabrio@lemmy.world 16 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Pfft. Not even going to be the hottest this year.

Hottest Summer 2: Australian Boogaloo

[-] shortwavesurfer@monero.town 5 points 11 months ago

This summer was really terrible and i am glad its over.

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 1 points 11 months ago

Did Texas not experience blackouts? I thought I read that.

[-] pdxfed@lemmy.world -4 points 11 months ago

No, no blackouts what you say?? Grid strong, best privatization strength grid. China respect Ughurs, and Will bring peace to Taiwan with more military there. Also, best country North Korea, freedom freeest here in rich, happy country. Putin good for Ukraine, Ukraine people love new freedom thank you Putin! Trump help little man against rich billionaires like trump, you see I trust!

--definitely a normal, average internet user and not a shill

[-] RealFknNito@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago

Nuclear might have helped a bit more but yeah, glad renewable did something I suppose. The hotter solar panels get the less effective they are so not super excited for that one.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 9 points 11 months ago

Nuclear would help it be really expensive. It doesn't ramp up and down with demand.

Solar does plenty when the sun is out, even if the temperature means efficiency isn't at its peak. In other words, you gain several fold for a sunny day, while losing a few percent due to heat. That pattern tends to correspond with AC usage, so it's actually ideal.

[+] RealFknNito@lemmy.world -8 points 11 months ago

I'll keep it a buck with you, solar panels are more expensive relative to their energy output. I get solar and renewable energy is the dream for most but as someone unafraid of nuclear fission, the only dream for me is fusion. Widespread adoption and better batteries would make renewables better but from the information I've seen, nothing compares to nuclear power per kw/h. Not even all renewables combined on their best day.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 9 points 11 months ago

And yet no one with money to invest in the energy sector is caring to put a dime into new nuclear. They looked at their options and picked the one that doesn't have a long history of cost and schedule overruns.

[-] RealFknNito@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago

And the overuse of materials for solar is going to drive up their price and repair costs but hey we'll see

[-] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 11 months ago

Which material do you think will be the limiting factor on photovoltaic production?

[-] RealFknNito@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

Perovskite.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Lol, no. Besides the fact that we've barely started scaled production of perovskite cells, and that we're still working out their longevity issues, their main advantage is that the materials used are cheap and abundant.

[-] RealFknNito@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

Lol it's a mineral that requires Titanium to form and last I checked that wasn't cheap. Not only that, but every first person country all at once making Perovskite cells, it'll end up like Lithium in time. But again, even now as they exist, they pale in comparison to what nuclear can produce.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It's not even the most prominent means of production yet. It's about at the same level as SMRs, which are years away if they work at all.

Edit: also, you're thinking of perovskite minerals. What the yet-to-be solar panels use is perovskite crystal structures, which are abundant as hell.

[-] RealFknNito@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

"Prone to degradation due to salt" is the part that I'm trying to illustrate. Yes, we have the materials for the moment but as demand increases and solar cells fail, will maintaining them and making new ones still be as cost effective as a nuclear plant down the road? That's the basis of my concern and why renewables, while a great step in the right direction, seem to need so much more space and maintaining for less power.

this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2023

257 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

58100 readers

4900 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS