AEMO boss says nuclear too slow to replace coal, and confirms that “notion of baseload” will not compete with grid powered by cheaper renewables.

The head of the Australian energy market operator AEMO, Daniel Westerman, has rejected nuclear power as a way to replace Australia’s ageing coal-fired power stations, arguing that it is too slow and too expensive. In addition, baseload power sources are not competitive in a grid dominated by wind and solar energy anyway.

  • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
    166·
    4 months ago

    The alternative for base load is batteries, not wind and solar renewables, since they are intermittent. We don’t have a good idea yet of just how expensive massive grid storage is yet, but the lead time would definitely be shorter.

    • Nomecks@lemmy.ca
      91·
      4 months ago

      We do though. The cost is really land and rust. Iron oxide batteries are cheap and long lasting but low power density. Perfect for grid storage in a lot of places.

    • zaphod@sopuli.xyz
      61·
      4 months ago

      The alternative to base load is load shifting, just move most loads to when enough power is available. Or in other words, base load is a thing because big power plants like nuclear and coal are slow and someone’s gotta use that power at all times.

      • intensely_human
        2·
        4 months ago

        Load shifting is the destruction of economic value, because it means people are making choices that aren’t optimal for their own lives.

        Time is often written off in economic considerations, but that’s unwise because time is the most limited resource people have.

        • phneutral@feddit.orgOP
          1·
          4 months ago

          Most work is done when the sun is shining. Appliances can be remote controlled or automated. Studies have show that only 10% of energy consumption has to be „smart“ to cut off 90% of the duck curve. The rest can be done with batteries and other storage.