gumby
6 hours ago
Why aren’t the dot centers bribing the locals with infrastructure? DC needs a GW of capacity? Build 3 GV, put 2 into the grid at low cost, build out transmission?
It used to be standard that companies would build infrastructure along with their plants. Cities all across the US Midwest were built this way.
Terr_
4 hours ago
> Why aren’t the dot centers bribing the locals with infrastructure?
It might be that they can't. (Well, not without spending even more money or time.)
They're looking for power which:
1. Fits on-site, rather than needing more space or being far away and dependent on the grid.
2. Can be ramped up on-demand, to keep their stuff running if there's a blackout.
3. Prioritizes their facility with "first dibs" when there are brownouts or other issues.
4. Can be built quickly so that they can finish the facility and start selling/renting.
These requirements are tend to conflict with the goals of making cheap power for sale: An offshore wind-farm might mollify local ratepayers, but it doesn't do anything for their facility reaching "ready".
AnthonyMouse
5 hours ago
If you offer to add a bunch of offshore wind turbines or build a new nuclear plant, what happens? It's basically "address NIMBY opposition by doing something that incurs NIMBY opposition".
The real problem is that politics has gotten so broken that people have lost the connection between building things and having them. You'll have the same people opposing new generating capacity while complaining about high electric bills.
hnav
5 hours ago
Vogtle 3/4 cost 30B and took 15 years for 2GW. Gas turbines pollute and need gas infrastructure. Solar needs better batteries.
Leonard_of_Q
4 hours ago
So, cut the red tape which makes building a new nuclear power plant take 15 years, standardise on a few type-approved installations, get enough battery storage built to replaced most peaker plants. Do it already, stop this endless discussion which has led nowhere for the last 30-40 years.