this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
221 points (94.4% liked)

Green Energy

2277 readers
148 users here now

Everything about energy production and storage.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ticho 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

FWIW, Baltic countries are going hard for solar, see https://lemmy.world/post/17098210

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Baltics powered by Finnish and Swedish nuclear.

[–] ticho 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Well, that's a bald-faced lie. Maybe if we were only talking about Lithuania, which does import big chunk of its energy budget from Sweden, but Estonia and Latvia generate most of their energy on their own - and according to the linked article, plan to generate even more in near future.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Context is everyting. Here's some cold hard facts for you:

As of 00:00 on 19/07/2024:

| Country | From | % | MW | |--------------| -------- |


| ---- | | Estonia | Finland | 37% | 358 | | Latvia | Estonia | 33% | 325 | | Lithuania | Sweden | 40% | 733 |

% being the overall percentage of electricity consumption.

So >1GW imported from SE/FI out of ~4GW total in the Baltics is imported from countries with 40-50% nuclear baseload.

source https://electricitymaps.com/

[–] PixelatedSaturn -3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Everyone is or at least tries to portray they are. Your article could be written for almost any country in the world.

But that doesn't mean a country can be run on solar alone.

[–] kaffiene 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Who is suggesting solar alone?

[–] PixelatedSaturn 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Many people seem to think that's the idea. I don't know about you, but when you frame the discussion as solar vs nuclear, that is what you are suggesting.

[–] kaffiene 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I mean, it's fair to compare the two techs but that's different from suggesting that you need a single approach to generation. No one is seriously suggesting that only solar for generation is sensible

[–] PixelatedSaturn -1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I'm not sure if this is your first conversation on the topic but the debate is almost entirely on renewables vs nuclear.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

There are many other types of renewables than just solar.

[–] PixelatedSaturn -2 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You are not arguing in good faith if you use exclusively solar in one sentence and then make sweeping generalisations about renewables in another. And yes, consider this a final warning from a mod of this community.

[–] PixelatedSaturn 1 points 5 months ago

I mean, you can ban me for a sarcastic post on your dumb one, sure go ahead if that flicks your switch I guess.

I am arguing in good faith. I live in a country where there isn't enough good areas for wind and the weakness of the distribution network and other factors like amount of sun prevent quick installations of significant amount of solar. We already have nuclear, the knowhow and place the build more.

So you and everyone else can try to convince me that I don't live where I do, I will still live where I live.

Now ban me and show me what a big man you are.

[–] kaffiene 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Did you notice yourself using the word "solar" in this conversation rather than "renewables"?

[–] PixelatedSaturn 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yes. I used renewables. But I used solar before because that was specifically the conversation. What a funny and irrelevant question.

[–] kaffiene 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

FFS if you can't see that changing the topic of conversation effects the meaning of people's responses then I don't know what to tell you. I'm done here

[–] PixelatedSaturn 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] kaffiene 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Moves goalposts. Gets called on it. Acts like a dick. What a waste of space.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Oh. You are back! I thought you said you were done? But you decided try with insults again?

How cute. But you failed the first time, now it's just cringe 😂.

Too cringe for me I'm afraid. Bye.

[–] ticho 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

No, the article definitely could not be written for any country in the world, because it lists concrete actions, numbers for past few years, and concrete plans for next few years.

But judging from your comments here and elsewhere in the thread, you do not care about discussion, and will move goalposts whenever it suits you. You are not a nice person. So, PLONK.

[–] PixelatedSaturn 1 points 5 months ago

Not true. You don't seem to know much about energy policies in EU.

But well... Bye