Thread

1. testing22321 · 1790741363 · focus · HN ↗

   Place your bets now.

   Time until first power generated, and actual final total cost.

   I’ll go 15 years and $10 Billion.

   1. rayiner · 1790770690 · focus · HN ↗

      what is the timeline and cost for 300 MW of solar plus the battery back up to make it 24/7?

      1. testing22321 · 1790775651 · focus · HN ↗

         For fun, Gemini says between 1.1 and 3.8 billion, and 3-5 years.

         That number will decrease every month too.

         1. borodi · 1790777725 · focus · HN ↗

            The gemini solar project in Nevada is 700 MW power + 4 hours of batteries at 380MW and cost 1.9 billion. Took 2 years and that was in 2022

            1. rayiner · 1790777838 · focus · HN ↗

               Is 4 hours of battery an equivalent comparison to a nuclear plant?

               1. borodi · 1790778737 · focus · HN ↗

                  I'm not anti nuclear or anything like that. It's just the financial comparison one has to make. Currently competing with solar + batteries is hard since unlike SMRs which hypothetically will get cheaper, they are getting cheaper at a quick rate and don't have the history of cost overruns that nuclear does.

                  1. rayiner · 1790784425 · focus · HN ↗

                     I understand. My point simply is that the relevant price comparison is nuclear versus solar + enough batteries to make the solar plant equivalent to a nuclear plant. The battery system is the lynchpin of efforts to substitute solar for nuclear, and the cost/timeline of that should be factored in. But usually we just see an apples-to-oranges comparison of nuclear by itself and solar by itself.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.