• AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, if you only want meaningful power on a sunny day in daylight hours.

    Where’s all this paradigm changing battery tech I keep hearing is on the way for 20 years?

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      They still generate power even on overcast days. Think about the difference between the middle of the night and an overcast day. It’s still a considerable amount of light.

      • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        From experience, I’m aware that they do.

        A small fraction of what they generate in direct sunlight.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not a small fraction it’s less but it’s not a small fraction.

          Overcast days typically generate about 40% of what they would generate on a sunny day. Remember temperature isn’t relevant, in fact they don’t actually like being too hot, so weirdly solar panels might actually not work very well in the Sahara desert.

          So unless you regularly have to deal with San Francisco style fog, and basically only San Francisco has fog like that because it’s quite a weird microclimate, you’ll be alright with solar pretty much anywhere in the world that isn’t inside the Arctic circle.

        • schroedingershat@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          If the alternative to 50c/W solar is paying $20/W, you only need it to run at 2.5% of nameplate to come out ahead.

    • schroedingershat@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It arrived over the last 5 years.

      Additionally diurnal storage is required for nuclear to meet a variable load anyway (as an 8hr battery is $2.5/W vs $20/W for additional reactor capacity). So the comparison then becomes building the nuclear reactor to run at <25% load factor vs. filling the rest of the load with any other method.

    • kugel7c@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You just don’t need that much storage and at the same time battery storage is already being installed at an exponential rate, much like PV started to some 15 years ago. We also already have hydro and gas peaker plants that aren’t going anywhere for the next 10ish years.