ViewTrick1002

Which means new nuclear is about the worst thing we can spend our limited resources on since it won't be coming online until the 2040s, and then at a ruinosuly expensive price.

Meanwhile renewables and storage are reshaping our global energy system due to being the cheapest globally scalable energy source in human history.

We also need to keep in mind nuclear supply chains. After 21 sanction packages the EU still haven't sanctioned Russia's nuclear industry.

We're simply too deeply entangled across the entire supply chain: nuclear fuel, enrichment, reprocessing, technological partnerships, reactor maintenance, new construction and more.

No this is misinformation that continues to be spread.

The Iberian blackout was caused by a lack of reactive power leading to voltages going out of their designed ranges.

The Iberian grid had adequate inertia at the time.

Reasonable grids have forced inverter based generation to manage reactive power for over a decade. But Spain due to lackluster processes relied on thermal plants to provide it. And they didn’t provide the expected amount.

There were some more confounders around oscillations and what not but the central cause came down to voltage control. Which is near trivial to solve in 2026. If you just force everyone to do it.

That is ancillary services. And where all battery implementations started before saturating those marketss.

We've now past that and batteries are actively killing the business case for fossil gas peakers while renewables are doing the same for legacy thermal producers.

It does. At some point the next marginal investor looks at the market and can’t make their money back.

But it is a problem for legacy thermal electricity producers being undercut by renewables and storage.

Add a bit of firming and you can. Or just accept a tiny bit of fossil fuels. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good enough.

We still need to decarbonize agriculture, chemicals, aviation, shipping, heavy industry, construction and so on. Most of which use either chemical energy carriers, or fossil feedstock.

Siphoning off a tiny bit off that for grid firming duty is trivial. Or do sustainable biofuels from food waste and so on.

Which is also what the system studies lands on. Finding that adding new nuclear makes it far more expensive.

Not really given how ruinously expensive it is? Isn’t the most decarbonization per dollar the fastest what matters?

Which is crying over spilled milk. We live in 2026.

Today renewables and storage are the cheapest energy source in human history, and is reshaping the global energy system.

Given that Germany's coal burning levels are the lowest in over 70 years please do explain how Germany replaced nuclear with coal.

I just can't comprehend why some people get so upset by Germany.

In my experience LLMs tend to work far better when they have a tree of structured information to search through and change.

Compared to poking at a mungy ball of accidental state where every change introduces complexity for the future which every downstream agent needs to correctly find.