I have to wonder how many times more capacity they would have got if they spent all that money on nuclear.
[QUOTE=download;47138806]I have to wonder how many times more capacity they would have got if they spent all that money on nuclear.[/QUOTE]
on the other side, ~30% of the germans power is green.
[QUOTE=download;47138806]I have to wonder how many times more capacity they would have got if they spent all that money on nuclear.[/QUOTE]
It would be less. According to a report of the U.S. EIA in 2012-2013, uranium power plants are nearly four times as expensive to operate and maintain compared to [I]solar power plants[/I]. I assume this video is talking about consumer solar panel installations and not solar power plants so it might not be four times as expensive.
Source: [url]http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/capitalcost/[/url]
See table 1.
[QUOTE=download;47138806]I have to wonder how many times more capacity they would have got if they spent all that money on nuclear.[/QUOTE]
I'm all for nuclear energy but what's wrong with using solar panels if you can afford it?
[QUOTE=martijnp3000;47139459]It would be less. According to a report of the U.S. EIA in 2012-2013, uranium power plants are nearly four times as expensive to operate and maintain compared to [I]solar power plants[/I]. I assume this video is talking about consumer solar panel installations and not solar power plants so it might not be four times as expensive.
Source: [url]http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/capitalcost/[/url]
See table 1.[/QUOTE]
Yes, well, that's not the cost per unit of energy produced. This wonderful table here I stole from Wikipedia does however and shows that it's far cheaper.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/dxZ9cy6.png[/img]
Notice solar power has a capacity factor of 25%. That means that because half the day is night time you aren't producing power, and during the afternoon and morning you're producing less power because there is less sun hitting the surface of the Earth. I would further say 25% is an optimistic amount that you would probably only find near the equator and in German in real life you would have a CF far lower than that.
[QUOTE=Kljunas;47139641]I'm all for nuclear energy but what's wrong with using solar panels if you can afford it?[/QUOTE]
Because for the same amount of money they could have had a far greater nuclear generating capacity reducing their carbon footprint even further.
[editline]15th February 2015[/editline]
The French have a pretty damning comparison here:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/4PRSisn.png[/img]
I should probably throw in the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]link too.[/url]
The problem with solar power isn't its efficiency, but the availability of electricity at certain times. With conventional power plants you can decide when to start them up, with solar power you are dependent on the sun. And if you think of just charging up some batteries, with current battery technology you would need gigantic facilities to house them.
It is such a problem that there are types of plants that use leftover electricity to pump water to a higher altitude. That way the water can be used later to generate electricity through hydroelectric power plants.
[editline]14th February 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=martijnp3000;47139459]It would be less. According to a report of the U.S. EIA in 2012-2013, uranium power plants are nearly four times as expensive to operate and maintain compared to [I]solar power plants[/I]. I assume this video is talking about consumer solar panel installations and not solar power plants so it might not be four times as expensive.
Source: [url]http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/capitalcost/[/url]
See table 1.[/QUOTE]
If solar power was cheaper than nuclear, it would be more widely used. And my bill for electricity would be lower.
[QUOTE=download;47139741]The French have a pretty damning comparison here:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/4PRSisn.png[/img]
I should probably throw in the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]link too.[/url][/QUOTE]
That's for 2011, and even then it was a bizarre outlier for predicted cost. Solar's cost per watt has been plummeting for years and hasn't stopped yet.
[QUOTE=Impact1986;47141781]The problem with solar power isn't its efficiency, but the availability of electricity at certain times. With conventional power plants you can decide when to start them up, with solar power you are dependent on the sun. And if you think of just charging up some batteries, with current battery technology you would need gigantic facilities to house them.
It is such a problem that there are types of plants that use leftover electricity to pump water to a higher altitude. That way the water can be used later to generate electricity through hydroelectric power plants.
[editline]14th February 2015[/editline]
If solar power was cheaper than nuclear, it would be more widely used. And my bill for electricity would be lower.[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure how anyone can be rating this dumb. He's exactly right.
[editline]15th February 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Thy Reaper;47141960]That's for 2011, and even then it was a bizarre outlier for predicted cost. Solar's cost per watt has been plummeting for years and hasn't stopped yet.[/QUOTE]
So solar power is 5-6x cheaper than it was 4 years ago and you've factored in the cost having a extra solar cells to provide power at night along with the energy storage systems they need?
[QUOTE=download;47138806]I have to wonder how many times more capacity they would have got if they spent all that money on nuclear.[/QUOTE]
If they spent money on nuclear, they'd have to spend continuously more money over time on finding a place to dispose of the waste in a safe and efficient manner, leading to an even higher TCO over a long period of time.
[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;47143762]If they spent money on nuclear, they'd have to spend continuously more money over time on finding a place to dispose of the waste in a safe and efficient manner, leading to an even higher TCO over a long period of time.[/QUOTE]
Actually, it's factored into the cost of electricity. I don't think you understand how small and compact the waste that comes out of a nuclear power plant is.
These are all things that companies factor in when they build NPPs and if it wasn't commercially viable it simply wouldn't be built. The only reason solar plants are built is because of massive government subsidies.
[QUOTE=download;47143914]Actually, it's factored into the cost of electricity. I don't think you understand how small and compact the waste that comes out of a nuclear power plant is.
These are all things that companies factor in when they build NPPs and if it wasn't commercially viable it simply wouldn't be built. The only reason solar plants are built is because of massive government subsidies.[/QUOTE]
And don't forget that the latest generation of nuclear powerplants are able to use the nuclear waste of older generations of nuclear powerplants as fuel, reducing leftover waste even more.
music made the video tbh
some generic ambient shit's usually what goes into videos like these but the staccato percussion really gave it a unique vibe
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
