208
submitted 2 years ago by Blair@slrpnk.net to c/energy@slrpnk.net

According to data from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), more than 20 gigawatts (GW) of battery capacity have been added to the US electric grid in the last four years. This rapid expansion is equivalent to the production of 20 nuclear reactors and is crucial for averting power disruptions, especially in states that rely significantly on intermittent renewable energy sources such as wind and solar.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] reddig33@lemmy.world 32 points 2 years ago

I’d like to see a cost comparison. I’m guessing all that battery storage cost less than the price of a nuclear reactor over its lifetime.

[-] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 47 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The 2 most recent reactors built in the US, the Vogtle reactors 3 and 4 in Georgia, took 14 years at 34 billion dollars. They produce 2.4GW of power together.

For comparison, a 1 GW solar/battery plant opened in nevada this year. It took 2 years from funding to finished construction, and cost 2 billion dollars.

So an equivalent in solar power generation/storage vs nuclear is about 7x faster and 1/8th the cost than nuclear.

[-] EleventhHour@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Yes, but one must also factor in the cost of the power source. Is it a solar or wind farm? Is it just off the grid? One way or another, the cost of the power source does factor into this. You know, because nuclear reactors, etc, generate power, but batteries merely store it.

[-] GetOffMyLan@programming.dev 17 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

That second one is a solar farm / battery installation. So it's included.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2024
208 points (96.0% liked)

Green Energy

4635 readers
42 users here now

Everything about energy production and storage.

Related communities:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS