Hacker News Reader

Why is both not an option? Nuclear works well where solar and wind don't.

Which is like in the polar high north of the arctic circle?

What’s the relevance?

Or on a windless night?

Those system cost analyses easily solve, at far lower costs than involving new nuclear.

I favor a "diversify" approach more than I have a dogmatic interest in any one source. The benefits of developing any of these far outweigh the costs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com