Thanks...
The difference must be that they spend more time actually on-line than some other technologies.
And, come to think of it, some of the natgas plants I’m familiar with are up and down all the time. The fact that they are relatively easy to start up and shut down means that they tend to be used in exactly that way. Running when they need them (or when the economics are favorable) and shut down when not. One was a “peaker” and would run in the mornings, and then again in the afternoon and evening. The other, they studied the fuel and transmission costs daily to decide if they would run that day.
I can imagine that nukes, you would never shut them down. Let them run, and use the more flexible plants to take up the slack.
Absolutely. If wind runs 25% of the time compared to a nuke plant running 100%, you could have twice the capacity and only produce half the electricity. Makes it rather important when comparing cost per kilowatt to install, instead of price per kilowatt-hour.
some of the natgas plants I’m familiar with are up and down all the time. The fact that they are relatively easy to start up and shut down means that they tend to be used in exactly that way.
Many Natural Gas Turbines are used just this way. They are quick to bring up and down, relatively cheap to install, but more expensive to continuously run. That makes them good "peakers".