[flagged]
I haven't seen any on HN across multiple submissions discussing both solar and nuclear power (or both at once).
I have, however, seen people unreasonably characterized as such.
Solar does not 'just work' - in the US it's a crisis in the making. Power prices in several areas of the grid routinely go negative because the grid is a zero sum game - there is very little storage so what goes in must exactly match what goes out or grid frequency deviations and eventually blackouts happen. This is much more likely to happen once undispatchable resources climb past a certain threshold in our generation mix.
To fix this we need massive storage and transmission investment, like moon landing and WW2 put together. We desperately need to do that before we add more non-dispatchable generation.
Solar with storage is an amazing resource. Without storage it's counterproductive if it's grid tied.
Solar creates the economic incentive for storage. Without solar coming first, storage cannot occur.
You can see this in California. In the beginning, it made sense to install only solar, because energy developers are compensated at the margin. Once the grid is saturated with solar, then the marginal economics changes in response to the duck curve, and storage starts to make economic sense.
If you block solar, you block storage. To believe otherwise is to be ignorant of the temporal aspect of the economics.
Solar is not dispatchable like a gas power plant is as the sun needs to shine to produce electricity. But it can very much be curtailed to any percentage you want. And that is being done globally every day exactly when it would be uneconomical to generate that electricity.
Interestingly this is as opposed to nuclear energy, which is basically never curtailed and always runs at 100% unless needed for maintenance or safety. Which is one of the main factors why nuclear energy is not economical anymore in a modern grid that values flexibility over constant generation.
I know, that's why I said it's basically never done. And it's usually not even done even if the price is zero or below, because a lot of nuclear power plants have fixed prices that are guaranteed by the government. Also, operating costs of nuclear power plants stay the same even if you curtail it 100%, so it's more economical to curtail something else.