Price of solar dropped 89% in ten years
MrEff @ MrEff @lemmy.world Posts 1Comments 115Joined 2 yr. ago
MrEff @ MrEff @lemmy.world
Posts
1
Comments
115
Joined
2 yr. ago
https://www.powerengineeringint.com/renewables/lcoe-for-offshore-wind-now-on-par-with-coal-bnef/amp/
Covid actually had almost no impact on the prices and they continued to level off a little lower. The surprising one is the onshore wind remaining on par with solar and continues to drop (albeit slowely).
"Today there are about 440 nuclear power reactors operating in 32 countries plus Taiwan, with a combined capacity of about 390 GWe. In 2022 these provided 2545 TWh, about 10% of the world's electricity."
There have been two major reactor accidents in the history of civil nuclear power – Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi. Chernobyl involved an intense fire without provision for containment, and Fukushima Daiichi severely tested the containment, allowing some release of radioactivity.
Yes- a track record of one plant failing due to Soviet incompetence and political blunders; and the second failing due to checks notes a 9.0 magnitude almost direct earthquake and ensuing 133 ft tsunami.
I can see that critical thinking isn't your strong suit, but I'm willing to comment it out with you instead of just down voting.
If the price of solar is already the lowest -and still dropping- then how is the most expensive option that takes about a decade to implement a better option for right now? This apparent point of diminishing returns is only beginning to manifest in even lower prices than this 2019 chart. And this diminishing returns point is only in the cost of the panels dropping; they are still getting better in technology and improving efficiency while maintaining low prices. If your argument is "solar can't continue on this trend forever" -no one expects anything to consistently drop almost 90% every decade. Of course it will level out. And when it does, it will STILL be the cheapest option.
Huge up front costs.
https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power.aspx
"On a levelized (i.e. lifetime) basis, nuclear power is an economic source of electricity generation, combining the advantages of security, reliability and very low greenhouse gas emissions. Existing plants function well with a high degree of predictability. The operating cost of these plants is lower than almost all fossil fuel competitors, with a very low risk of operating cost inflation. Plants are now expected to operate for 60 years and even longer in the future...."
"World Nuclear Association published Nuclear Power Economics and Project Structuring in early 2017. The report notes that the economics of new nuclear plants are heavily influenced by their capital cost, which accounts for at least 60% of their LCOE. Interest charges and the construction period are important variables for determining the overall cost of capital. The escalation of nuclear capital costs in some countries, more apparent than real given the paucity of new reactor construction in OECD countries and the introduction of new designs, has peaked in the opinion of the International Energy Agency (IEA). In countries where continuous development programmes have been maintained, capital costs have been contained and, in the case of South Korea, even reduced. Over the last 15 years global median construction periods have fallen. Once a nuclear plant has been constructed, the production cost of electricity is low and predictably stable."
TLDR: If you weren't already on the nuke train when it was going, the upfront costs are too much to make it worth it this late in the game. You are better off just getting solar/wind + battery. If you already invested in nuke, then you are good to keep updating them.
I used to have a 92 Honda accord. The car was built on par with Toyota as far as reliability. With that said though, there was one time it wouldn't start. Push started it, it worked,, but when starting- the problem persisted. Went to a shop to diagnose it. Turns out manual cars normally use a clutch switch to tell if you have the clutch pressed to start the car. There is a little rubber standoff on it to dampen the clutch pedal coming back up and hitting it, making it last longer. The little rubber bit fell out and got lodged making the switch not disengage. It was a 10 cent part that cost me an hour of diagnostic time (the minimum). So yes, manual cars still have an equivalent problem to what you had.
Funny you say that- that isn't far from how it was made. Someone wrote a spec script about a human war with space bugs, independent of starship troopers. When one of the production people read the script they brought up the point that there was a book that they remembered that was kind of like it. When they checked, no one had the film rights to it so they bought it for cheap. They then did a quick rewrite to slap in the character names and basic/cheap/easy things from the book to make more of an appeal to the book fans. Then when the director came on board he was a fan if the book but also wanted to do his own thing. So you now had at least 3 different directions the story was going and it was simply held together by the loose premise of starship troopers.
Over the course of 20 years, the US and its coalition allies in Afganistan killed approximately 50,000 civilians and there we calls for war crimes investigations. In the course of one month Israel has killed over 10,000 civilians.
I did two tours in Afghanistan and can tell you now, they are not bending over backwards to minimize it. They are using this as an excuse to indemnify themselves from war crimes prosecution.
'The pentagon' isn't an agency. It is a building. That is it. It houses many of those agencies or representatives within it along with the DoD. But 'the pentagon' is only a name placeholder for a conglomeration of DoD and DoD adjacent agencies.
Death toll as of yesterday was reported around 8,000. The US/coalition 20-year war in Afghanistan was (rounding UP) 50,000. That puts it at an average of 2,500 civilian deaths per year. Even THAT number was high enough for people to call for war crimes investigations. Now Israel has reached over 3x the yearly average in only 3 weeks. On track to pass 10,000 by the one month mark, too. I'm not saying that Isreal doesn't have the right to defend its self, or even defense through offense, but there is a point that we need to agree is too far; and I think we are a bit past it.
After rereading this in the morning/afternoon and not late night I realized my mistake. BPPV is normally the posterior, more infrequently the anterior, and to be true up/down vertigo only it would have to be both canals at the same time. The vestibular organ is odd. Either way, this whole scenario doesn't even sound like bppv (peripheral) and is most likely something up line in the brain (central).
Go see neuro. Get an mri at least.
Unlike the othe comment, this DOES sound like it could be BPPV, where something like the epley maneuver would work. Typically we would use the Semont-plus maneuver (same idea, slightly different). Or there is a fun half somersault maneuver the person could try on their own.
Bppv will be brief but intense episodes lasting seconds with lasting nausea for minutes and exasterbated by head movements. You will also see their eyes jumping or flicking (nystagmus).
The epley maneuver is to treat BPPV- where an otolith becomes dislodged and then finds its way into a semicircular canal (normally the latteral canal). If it was causing vertigo it would have to be the posterior canal. Not to say it isn't possible, but it is the statistically least common canal to happen in. Not only that, but the epley wouldn't treat it. Even then, this strongly doesn't sound like BPPV, whose episodes would last seconds to minutes. If the episodes are lasting minutes to hours it is a short list of other possible things. best case this is vestibular migraine of it was vestibular related. More likely this is central involve ment and the person needs to see a neurologist. I have seen patients like this before for balance accessments. We will do the testing on them(VNG and caloric testing), but then have to tell them to go to a different department because it isn't part of the vestibular system causing the problem. I would push to see an ENT/neuro/PCP sooner than later because worst case is it is a developing vestibular schwanoma (non cancerous tumor) and the sooner the better to take care of it or at least monitor it.
https://www.powerengineeringint.com/renewables/lcoe-for-offshore-wind-now-on-par-with-coal-bnef/amp/