Not sure why Germany is reverting back to coal fired power stations and mothballing many of its supposedly clean nuclear power stations. Why China is approving at least two coal stations a week instead of nuclear?
Even the UK which is supposed to be ahead with moving towards net zero suffered badly. I would be interested to know which countries in the EU that had invested in renewables never suffered as a result of the conflict and higher prices?
There is no way renewables on their own can cope with the demand during the summer periods never mind the winters and that is a major penalty.
As others have pointed out, you cannot simple reactivate a nuclear power station. It takes years, so that is an irrelevant point. China may be opting for coal fired stations becasue they can be relatively quickly brought on line rather than the decades for a nuclear. By the same token you can decommission coal fired stations more quickly, so coal would be the choice if it was only a short term need.
I did not say or imply that any EU countries had no negative impacts, just that those with more renewables were better off. Apart from the price hikes, how did the UK suffer? I'm not aware of any power cuts that were attributable to the Ukraine conflict. where as in some EU countries there were power restrictions.
Granted, that as things stand at the moment renewables in the UK (e.g. PV, Wind or Wave) cannot sustain our power needs on their own 24/7. However they don't need to as we do have some nuclear, and gas, and coal generation. As a result power was maintained.
There have been several occasions in recent months where renewables have carried the UK without the need for gas or coal support.
However with local (home batteries, Vehicle to load) and grid level power storage solutions becoming more common, the times are coming when excess capacity from renewables will be captured and then used to increase cover.
Facebook
Twitter