this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2024
255 points (96.7% liked)

Technology

59534 readers
3197 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

“But even in the only country that is massively building, China, nuclear development is comparatively marginal. In 2023, China started up one new nuclear reactor, that is plus 1 GW, and more than 200 GW of solar alone. Solar generated 40% more power than nuclear and all non-hydro renewables—mainly wind, solar, and biomass—generated four times as much as nuclear.”
The report also highlights how nuclear power is being challenged not only by the strong growth of solar and wind, but also by battery storage, whose costs are projected to decline below those of coal-fired and nuclear power plants by around 2025 in China. “Solar plus storage is already significantly lower than nuclear power in most markets today, as well as highly competitive with other low-emissions sources of electricity that are commercially available today,” it also notes.
The authors also cite data from investment bank Lazard revealing that solar-plus-storage can already be cheaper than gas peaking and new nuclear. “The competitive cost and large-scale availability of variable renewable energy sources combined with firming options—especially storage—could well turn out to be the game-changer of energy policy in the years to come,” they further explain.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] booly@sh.itjust.works 22 points 2 months ago (5 children)

So is biomass. And wind. And fossil fuels. And hydro.

In fact, I think only geothermal and fission aren't fusion-based.

[–] Greg@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Tidal is also non fusion based

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago

Not with that attitude

[–] Wrufieotnak@feddit.org 4 points 2 months ago

All atoms higher than hydrogen come from stars. So in the end, everything is derived from fusion. Therefore, geothermal and fission can only exist because of nuclear fusion.

[–] MouseKeyboard@ttrpg.network 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Fission is based on the fusion that took place in ancient supernovae.

[–] eleitl@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

Neutron star collision. Supernova nucleosynthesis is also when fusion turns off.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago

Fossil fuel is by extension of extension. Fission by extension of extension of extension.

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Everything is stardust so it's everything fusion based?

[–] eleitl@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

Heavier nucleosynthesis requires neutron star collisions, so not fusion-driven. Supernovas are also when fusion stops.

[–] booly@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The kinetic energy in that stardust, and the gravitational potential energy of stardust pulling itself into tighter balls, doesn't necessarily come from fusion. There's all sorts of cosmological forces and energy out there, and I don't think they all trace back to nucleii smushing together.

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

That's true I suppose.