Nuclear Reactor Pool Fire/Huge Risks in U.S. According to Unpublicized NRC Study

[caraher]

57. "We don't need citations, statistical studies, and what not. "

You do if you want to publish your physics! Otherwise you're not doing physics but, at best, scientific masturbation.

I defy you to point to single article in the primary physics research literature, published within the last century, that includes no citations.

The fact is that this alleged 20% cap is about a complex technological system, and while yes, the law of conservation of energy must be satisfied, you have in now way established in any of your incarnations that the 20% figure is a hard cap imposed by physics. Everyone would agree that there is some limit, somewhere, to the ability of something like our current power distribution system to function essentially in the way that it generally does, to the fraction of the power renewables could supply without causing trouble. But you can't suss that limit out of back-of-the-envelope calculations with any substantial precision.

I've been through the reports cited by this and previous alter egos and the way they talk about "20%" is very broad and implies not that 20% is an absolute hard-and-fast upper limit, but rather that under 20% penetration the variability issue isn't a serious reason not to expand further. The real significance is that as one exceeds 20% it becomes important to proceed carefully... but as everyone here knows, in the US we're so far below that level that those challenges should not affect near-term planning.

In any event, the need to improve the grid is not limited to variability associated with wind and solar. Consider, for instance, a report from Oak Ridge a few years ago, "Nuclear Generating Stations and Transmission Grid Reliability"

Twenty-eight new nuclear plants are now being considered for license application according the to the NRC. Some of these may be completed as early as 2014, while it can easily take ten years or more to design, permit, and build new transmission lines. Presently, operating margins are being eroded on the transmission system because of the connection of new generation, higher flows, and the delay in building new transmission. The connection of these new nuclear plants to the grid will present a significant problem to grid reliability unless design improvements are made to enable them to regulate voltage and frequency as conventional generators do.

Of course, it turns out that particular threat to grid reliability did not emerge... but my real point is that one could just as easily concoct a claim that the "laws of physics" preclude adding many more nuclear plants because of grid reliability concerns as the claim that 20% represents some impenetrable barrier to renewables. Closer to the truth would be that we're going to need to manage decarbonization of our electricity system carefully, regardless of the favored technologies.