• If you Google “is a nuclear baseload required” you’ll find plenty of articles clearly demonstrating why this isn’t true. Renewables + storage solutions can provide the base load just fine. The biggest issues have been worked out already, it just needs to be built (which is expensive, but so would nuclear be).

    • Forester@yiffit.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Please tell me your plans for renewable storage to meet 84% of our power needs in the next 5 years

        • Forester@yiffit.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          That depends entirely on what design you go with. Ideally we would be looking at municipal level power generation with modern proven light water Small modular reactor designs reliant on passive safety features we can pump them out of factories at a rate of approximately two per day if we can look at the average aerospace industry rate of construction for jumbojets for a comparable engineering project in size and scope to most SM reactors.

          There are also many options to convert existing fossil-fired plants to be nuclear powered at the end of the day a turbine spinning is a turbine spinning. It doesn’t care whether you boiled the water with radiation or coal or oil or gas

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah, OP keeps using the lack of current investment in renewables as an argument that it can’t be done at scale. It’s a really weird lack of logic whether they’re aware of it and arguing in bad faith or just fundamentally confused…