Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Your logic is impeccable and many well-qualified observers have repeated it. Turns out not to be so:

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Grid-Integration...

The reason is human psychology: the systemic costs we pay for the old stuff is familiar and therefore doesn't seem noteworthy. From the link:

nuclear and large fossil plants actually have “far higher integration costs than renewables,” Goggin said. “Contingency reserves, the super-fast acting energy reserve supply required of grid operators in case a large power plant shuts down unexpectedly, are a major cost. Comparing the incremental cost of wind to those costs that ratepayers have always paid, the wind cost looks even more trivial.”



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: