Yes indeed, I told you soz

As I have noted a few time before this, one of the main problems with wind and solar power, despite their renewable "credentials", is that of varying supply. If you can't trust the power to be delivered in a somewhat regular fashion, then there has to be a good, safe, reliable, backup -- and with coal being increasing demonized (note that Virginia is closing down 18 coal plants), that type of alternative, for the time being, still seems to be best spelled "nuclear".

Fickle Winds, Intermittent Sunshine Start to Stress U.S. Power System


This NY Times article backs up my supposition and contention, showing that the increasing delivery of wind and solar power, which is by nature (yes indeed) variable, can stress the grid and power plants that need to cycle on or off to adjust to it. Note this:

"Officials of the American Wind Energy Association sparred with a representative of the Bentek Energy consulting firm, who presented a new analysis, "The Wind Energy Paradox." It asserts that increased wind energy output forces coal generation into inefficient start-stop operations that increase emissions of nitrogen- and sulfur-oxide pollutants."

--- Yes, this quote supports my position, and the American Wind Energy Association contends that it's not entirely realistic. But then, what about:

"Grid operators must plan for a future worst-case scenario of several consecutive days with very low wind and solar power coinciding with very high summer power demand, Pérez-Arriaga said. This is a key challenge in designing the long-term generation mix."

Ya gotta deal with that! So I humbly opinionate that nuclear power integration and storage technologies have to be included at a much higher level than is currently being discussed.