Sounds like you work in energy industry, if you do please post details.We have surplus energy only at night, during the day we have to bring online peaking plants to meet demand. And the current night surplus will be the first thing an expansion of EVs will eat up. The reason we are building more nukes is because our energy supply will soon be outstripped by demand. We do NOT have other good options that are both carbon free and reliable. If you know of some, please let us know.
Your location is Atlanta? Is it due to lack of power plants, RN and FF?
How much in your area is PV supplied?
EDIT: Apparently you do, reading a follow-up post.
You said:
While running existing plants at night will do the job, over time we will need to increase base load, and we do have time. But base load plants are expensive and take a long time to build and, unfortunately, the only base load option that is both clean and reliable is Nuclear, which remains controversial and is very, very
Personally I am not opposed to Nuclear, the safety of plants in US is far improved in last couple of decades, and the USN has an immaculate record.
Just as you said, it is controversial (due to idiots and surprise natural event) making cost and time to build almost suicidality expensive.
It is now about 10 years just to gain permission to build a NPP, let alone building one.
And then what to do with waste radioactive materials? 1000x worse than the NPP alone.
PV and Wind can be installed in a couple of weeks to a month. Storage systems can be built in as little time.
So primarily for expediency I am strongly for renewables, being carbon-free is added benefit.
And if people want to use FF, fine. We cannot trash ICE simply because of CO2 emissions, there needs to be a transition. It will be about 20 years before EV will be accepted by super majority.
I volunteer for a aviation museum, there will be no replacing FF for that (and there is a very good reason for the AvGas used today too, applies to ICE in future) ((Post coming.))
Last edited: