Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
1 - you are absolutely correct. A wind MW does not generate as many MWh as a nuclear MW. Still, in terms of showing that the scale of development of wind matches that of nuclear, the graph is relevant.

2 - the study I quote only uses data up to 2006, so the boom in solar over the past 2 years is probably not visible in these graphs.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Tue Oct 7th, 2008 at 03:56:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
  1. The comparison is between the exponentiality of the curves, using ad-hoc starting dates. The same could be done for generation, using different starting dates.

    I note that given the longer construction time for nuclear, an interesting comparison would be using the start of the construction of the first commercial plants as the respective starting date.

  2. No, it's until 2007, and PV installations were in the same ballpark in 2006. In fact, I suspect they committed another error: it seems they inserted the PV data backwards, given that the green column decreases from 2000 to 2007.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Tue Oct 7th, 2008 at 08:33:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series