It's not that solar cannot scale as is, it simply cannot scale as a power grid (see frequency sync issue as an example, even in day time).
As I said in the previous comment, you need alternate sources to maintain the power grid, even in day time. And no, battery is not a good option for it because it is very expensive. Using a coal/gas/nuclear station to maintain the grid in both day time and night time is the best option you have right now.
Solar is cheap if you only look at the panels and how much energy it produces. It is not cheap if you look at the whole grid, which is something omitted from reports you see.
I'm not against solar/wind. I'm just against it as the major source. 20-30% seems to be a good value for it.
> There was a time many decades ago to deploy nuclear at scale. Fossil fuel shills used 'environmentalists' to shut down all progress of nuclear. Now, they use nuclear again to slow down solar and wind. Just wait 30 - 50 years, we'll have a proper solution.
The best time to start was decades ago. The second best time is now.
Look at France, they have nuclear and they have energy security. Look at Germany and how foolish they were to deprecate all nuclear stations.
Australia has less than 10% solar/wind. Seems reasonable to me.
China is an exception, because they have the full pipeline to build batteries, panels. Which country has the full pipeline? Relying on China for panels & batteries for energy security? Huh?
As I said in the previous comment, you need alternate sources to maintain the power grid, even in day time. And no, battery is not a good option for it because it is very expensive. Using a coal/gas/nuclear station to maintain the grid in both day time and night time is the best option you have right now.
Solar is cheap if you only look at the panels and how much energy it produces. It is not cheap if you look at the whole grid, which is something omitted from reports you see.
I'm not against solar/wind. I'm just against it as the major source. 20-30% seems to be a good value for it.
> There was a time many decades ago to deploy nuclear at scale. Fossil fuel shills used 'environmentalists' to shut down all progress of nuclear. Now, they use nuclear again to slow down solar and wind. Just wait 30 - 50 years, we'll have a proper solution.
The best time to start was decades ago. The second best time is now.
Look at France, they have nuclear and they have energy security. Look at Germany and how foolish they were to deprecate all nuclear stations.
Australia has less than 10% solar/wind. Seems reasonable to me.
China is an exception, because they have the full pipeline to build batteries, panels. Which country has the full pipeline? Relying on China for panels & batteries for energy security? Huh?