|
| I guess I didn't know the left hated nuclear, I thought it was just everyone within 30 miles of any proposed building site.
I don't follow the complete hate for solar. I get that they're ugly, but I wouldn't want a coal plant next door either. I get they don't produce energy at night, but luckily we use most of the power during the day and when the sun is in the sky longer. I get they have been subsidized, but so has every form of power generation and solar is currently cheaper per unit of energy without subsidy while the tech improves every year. My understanding is it would currently be cheaper per MW to build enough solar to meet all energy demand along with enough battery storage to get us through the dark, unsubsidized, than most or all other forms of energy production.
It seems like a reasonable compromise to have fossil fuel production to get us through the dark, and solar to make up peak differences during the day.
FWIW I think nuclear is awesome but it's just not profitable and these companies goal is to make money. I think it's too dangerous to strip regulation to the bone for them if that is the argument for why they're so expensive. If you want to nationalize power supply and sink money to use nuclear to get there, maybe? | |
|
Grid tie solar lease rates
