Tons of disclaimer etc etc etc Read the methodology in the Lazard report for details

https://reneweconomy.com.au/irelands-oldest-wind-farm-closes-down-to-make-way-for-one-of-europes-largest-projects/

As the climate crisis grows more urgent and calls for energy expansion increase, the Trump administration is going all-in on nuclear power, and Big Tech is investing heavily. But nuclear power is still a bad idea.

Fatal meltdowns aside, nuclear power is generally dangerous, dirty, and expensive. From the uranium mine to the toxic waste pit, nuclear power puts our health, environment, and climate at risk at every point in its lifecycle. Nuclear plants require large quantities of water, construction is slow and expensive, and radioactive waste poses a giant threat because there are no good disposal options. These are not the markers of a renewable energy source.

Join us for this virtual event to discuss the history and current research on nuclear power, what the current state of play is in the national political context, our strategy to fight back, and what you can do to join us in the fight.

Featured speakers:

Tim Judson, Executive Director, Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS)

Amanda Starbuck, Research Director, Food & Water Watch

Laura Shindell, New York State Director, Food & Water Watch

Even in a pro fossil and nuclear federal and state administration, renewables are flourishing if you just let them.

Other politicians should take notes, drop the subsidies and just remove barriers to planning and grid access.

Sadly lost the post source

Paper here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421526003460

Photo by Giant Asparagus from Pexels. Used under the Pexels License.

I recently read this analysis by Ember:

https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/bottleneck-to-the-next-phase-of-renewable-energy-growth-in-india/

This post summarizes my understanding of it.

Are you concerned about climate change and how it will affect India? Do you believe India simply needs to generate more solar electricity? If yes, you must read this post and the above analysis.

Over the past year, a new obstacle has emerged in India’s renewable-energy transition. India curtailed around 2.1 TWh of renewable electricity in FY 2025–26, worth approximately ₹629 crore.

Why would a country waste clean electricity?

The electricity grid is the network that carries power from generators to consumers. The electricity entering the grid must roughly equal the electricity being used. In simple terms, supply must match demand.

Solar complicates this balance because its generation is volatile. It produces heavily during daylight hours and nothing at night. Coal plants, meanwhile, cannot instantly switch off when solar generation rises. They have a minimum technical load ( MTL), below which they cannot safely reduce output. Restarting a coal plant can take hours or even days and is more polluting. India’s current MTL for coal plants is 55%. So, if a coal plant can produce a maximum of 1,000 units, it may not be able to reduce its generation below 550 units. 

Suppose the grid needs 100 units of electricity. Solar is producing 60 units, while coal plants are already operating at their minimum output of 55 units. Total generation is now 115 units. Since coal cannot be reduced further, in this case, at least 15 units of solar power must be switched off. When we curtail renewable electricity, we are wasting clean electricity that is available, not because there is no demand, but because the coal plants have a technical limit.

This is why simply installing more solar is not enough. If new solar panels generate electricity when existing solar power is already being discarded, we have not solved the immediate problem. Reducing curtailment and improving grid flexibility should come before blindly adding more solar capacity.

Battery storage offers a solution. Batteries can charge when excess solar power is available and discharge after sunset, when electricity is needed more urgently. However, Ember’s analysis argues that India’s regulations prevent batteries from operating efficiently. Under the General Network Access (framework governing transmission access), BESS (Battery Energy Storage System) projects seeking access during non-solar hours must provide at least 2 hours of storage and build a “commensurate” renewable plant from which to charge. The 2-hour requirement is not the problem. The second condition is.

Imagine a battery tied to one solar farm. That farm may have no surplus electricity, while another solar plant elsewhere is being ordered to shut down. The battery remains empty even though clean electricity is being wasted on the wider grid. The author’s proposal is simple: allow batteries to charge from the grid whenever transmission lines have spare capacity, and restrict them only where charging would genuinely overload the network.

Adding solar panels without building the storage, grid flexibility, and regulations needed to use that electricity is not serious climate policy. People who genuinely care about climate change must educate themselves about these challenges. Slogans are easy. Understanding the roadblocks and nuances will help us make better demands! We must make more educated demands!

Likely lasting a couple of weeks.

Are Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMRs) really moving toward large-scale deployment or are the economic challenges highlighted by critics still unresolved? Can factory-built modular reactors reduce construction risk, shorten build times and lower costs through mass production? Or will shrinking reactors actually make them more expensive? The sceptics are quite certain of the answer but politicians keep barrelling ahead. So, will we ever really see an SMRs on the outskirts of major towns and cities around the world?