• Allero
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Britain pioneers alternative power storage methods, particularly pumped hydro, and invests heavily in wind farms, diversifying the grid. So, at the end of the day, they don’t need backup power all that much.

    Rooftop solar is routinely connected to the grid - no need to build redundant and expensive battery banks for every home, but the power is produced locally, minimizing transmission losses and strain on the power lines.

    Nuclear, on its hand, is nice, but simply too expensive to build nowadays. Nuclear plants take a lot of time to pay off, so running existing plants is good, but building new ones can be a worse option overall.

    • toastmeister@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      Well wind farms won’t help, if you need 100% reliability. Storage I figured was more expensive than nuclear after adding all the costs together, creating enough hydro for backup is extremely expensive as well.

      You’re essentially building a hydro power plant, water storage, pumps, and wind turbine at that point.

      • Rivalarrival
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        13 hours ago

        The solution to reliability is to overbuild wind and solar, so that even suboptimal weather allows us to fully meet our essential needs.

        Which is still cheaper than nuclear.