According to data from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), more than 20 gigawatts (GW) of battery capacity have been added to the US electric grid in the last four years. This rapid expansion is equivalent to the production of 20 nuclear reactors and is crucial for averting power disruptions, especially in states that rely significantly on intermittent renewable energy sources such as wind and solar.
Can we please not post such dumb articles? Like any article mentioning battery capacity in watts
reddig33@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I’d like to see a cost comparison. I’m guessing all that battery storage cost less than the price of a nuclear reactor over its lifetime.
mosiacmango@lemm.ee 2 weeks ago
The 2 most recent reactors built in the US, the Vogtle reactors in Georgia, took 14 years at 34 billion dollars. They produce 2.4GW of power together.
For comparison, a 1.4 solar/battery plant opened in because this year. It took 2 years from funding to finished construction, and cost 2 billion dollars.
RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
Not trying to be a “nuclear shill”, but it is worth mentioning from the article you linked:
The capacity factor of solar is something around 25%, so that 690 MW solar array (even with batteries) produces about as much energy as ~160 MW nuclear… So 7x faster, but the costs are closer than you suggest. Solar is still cheaper because the O&M costs are minimal, but pretending 690 MW solar + 380 MW battery is equivalent to 1 GW nuclear is a bit disingenuous.
itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
Yet every time renewables are mentioned, the nuclear shills are out in force
EleventhHour@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Yes, but one must also factor in the cost of the power source. Is it a solar or wind farm? Is it just off the grid? One way or another, the cost of the power source does factor into this.
Antitoxic9087@slrpnk.net 1 week ago
Although renewable + bess still wins according to most recent studies on that matter, cost comparison between nuke and renewable / Bess is not that useful. Assumptions on the longevity of nuke reactors, for example, helps little if the fleet of reactors end up constantly break down and require repairment as in France and Belgium. So lcoe of nuke over long time span is highly uncertain and contingent. Plus the positive feedback loop of learning curve, evident in renewable and Bess, is not so visible for nuclear.
What is more useful for sake of current policy discussion is deployment rate and scalability, which renewable plus batteries clearly wins.