• DeckPacker@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    19 hours ago

    There is nothing wrong with solar + batteries, because battery prices (like solar) have been falling massively in the last few years. So solar + enough battery capacity is still dramatically cheaper that fossil fuels. Just look at what South Australian has been doing in the last few years.

    • encelado748@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      18 hours ago

      solar + enough battery capacity is still dramatically cheaper that fossil fuels

      This is not true everywhere. Solar + battery is dramatically cheaper if you only care about daily, 4h storage, to manage peaks. It is not cheaper if you need to manage multi-week lows with high reliability (like the one a gas power plant provide). To cover that use-case you need more investment in the grid, in solar overprovisioning (4x the usual capacity) and a lot of batteries. That makes the solar + battery solution costing around the same as nuclear and fossil fuel in most places. It is already cheaper in places like Australia, Texas, MENA region. It would be double the cost if done in places like Germany, or Scandinavia.

      Nonetheless, battery + solar is the future for places like Spain, Italy (still not in the north plain as fog can stop solar production for weeks): the price will go further down, and hybrid storage solution and small nuclear reactors could optimize the battery + solar combo even further.