this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2024
362 points (94.8% liked)
Technology
59341 readers
5021 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's an unusual take.
There are good applications for PV, but it is not reliable thermal power, so it will never sufficiently dispace fossil fuels. We need nuclear, concentrated solar, and/or deep-well geothermal power plants in order to accomplish that.
babies first electric resistive heater prototype would like to disagree with you.
I think they might be taking issue primarily with the "reliability", the argument that solar is all well and good, but because generation isn't uniform, it can't fully replace fossil fuels. And I can see the argument for using nuclear for base-load and supplement with solar as it's available to use.
i know what they're saying, but they're objectively wrong. Sure it's hard, it's not the most trivial thing to do. Harder than engineering, designing, and building a CCG turbine plant from the ground up? Highly doubt it, probably more expensive though.
Nuclear base load is an incredibly good strategy though, although nuclear isn't fossil fuels, so.