logoalt Hacker News

ethmarksyesterday at 9:00 PM1 replyview on HN

> Nuclear is expensive even after the reactor is build.

Solar panels and wind turbines need maintenance too. And they have much shorter operational lives than nuclear power plants, meaning they'll need to be expensively replaced much more frequently.

> And I wouldn’t call it progress to still rely on steam machines for energy

Could you please explain your objection to steam-based power? Is it purely aesthetic, or is there some inherent downside to steam turbines that I'm not aware of? Also, concentrated solar power systems that concentrate sunlight and use it to boil steam[1] are significantly more efficient than direct photovoltaics.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_solar_power


Replies

hvb2today at 8:13 AM

> Could you please explain your objection to steam-based power?

My guess would be that you're taking energy that you burn, you then boil water, water then goes through a number of turbines, then to a generator and then you might have electricity. Every step in that process is not 100% efficient.

Direct PV is, sunlight, cell that generates current, current gets transformed into whatever the grid needs. So it's fewer steps.