“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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      223 months ago

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

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

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        43 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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        23 months ago

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

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          23 months ago

          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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          23 months ago

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

  • FiveMacs
    link
    fedilink
    English
    403 months ago

    Holy hell, Photovoltaics

    Not ONCE does this article use the actual word and sticks to abbreviation for Photovoltaics.

    • @ShittyBeatlesFCPres
      link
      English
      303 months ago

      I imagine they assumed readers of PV Magazine would be photovoltaics enthusiasts.

      • FiveMacs
        link
        fedilink
        English
        153 months ago

        I guess but it’s still basic writing etiquette and clears up any potential misconception. It’s not like they pay by the letter anymore

    • RubberDuck
      link
      English
      103 months ago

      All it would have taken is: photovoltaics or PV for short…rest of article.

  • @dgmib
    link
    English
    133 months ago

    Such an incredibly misleading article.

    1 GW of nuclear capacity generates several times more electricity than 1 GW of PV capacity.

    Nuclear power plants run at almost full capacity pretty much 24/7/365. With the occasional shutdown every few years for maintenance and to replace the fuel rods.

    PVs only generate electricity during the day, and only hit their maximum capacity under ideal conditions. The average output of PVs is 15-25% of their capacity.

    Globally we generate more electricity from nuclear than we do from all PVs together.

    At the typical sizes we’re building them you need dozens of PV farms to match the energy output of a single nuclear reactor.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      103 months ago

      Five times more PVs at a 20% capacity factor means it evens out.

      The vast majority of those PV installations were in the last 7 years or so. We also built more manufacturing capability during that time. Meaning PV installations are being rolled out on an exponential curve, not a linear one.

      • @dgmib
        link
        English
        -53 months ago

        It’s not an exponential curve. It’s slower than that.

        It’s more than linear; we are adding more capacity each year than the year before. But added capacity per year as a percentage of the previous years total is a decreasing.

        If it was exponential the growth would be a straight(ish) line when plotted on a logarithmic scale… it’s not. On a log scale the line inflects.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          23 months ago

          It’s exponential.

          https://www.livemint.com/industry/energy/the-exponential-growth-of-solar-power-will-change-the-world-11724312451921.html

          To call solar power’s rise exponential is not hyperbole, but a statement of fact. Installed solar capacity doubles roughly every three years, and so grows ten-fold each decade. Such sustained growth is seldom seen in anything that matters. That makes it hard for people to get their heads round what is going on. When it was a tenth of its current size ten years ago, solar power was still seen as marginal even by experts who knew how fast it had grown. The next ten-fold increase will be equivalent to multiplying the world’s entire fleet of nuclear reactors by eight in less than the time it typically takes to build just a single one of them.

          • @dgmib
            link
            English
            3
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Whoever wrote that article is playing fast and loose with the definition of exponential.

            Here’s the actual data of global electricity source on a log scale for the past ~15 years

            Notice that the line for both wind and solar is inflecting to the right. If it was exponential it would be straight.

            The time between each doubling of output is increasing.

            It’s close, but not enough to be exponential growth.

            It was exponential for a while but it’s slowing down in the last decade or two.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -63 months ago

    Meh… this only makes sense in giant installations on the far side of the moon, then laser down the power.

    Covering the world in solar panels… not so much.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      43 months ago

      Yep, definitely not usable for a decentralized power grid. All those wasted PV cells on all those homes which now generate most of their used electricity themselves. Too bad that doesn’t work.