The part of the gas and steam power plant which may be in use in the future is the gas turbine part, which can be shut down and started relatively fast. The remaining really large 'steam' part will become basically useless as it has too much inertia.

I also don't understand why in my region black coal power plants were newly built until a few years ago.

[–] megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Gas turbines base load still take time to spin up and have lengthy shut down and start up procedures, even if they can be shut down. They are faster than a steam plant, but are not designed shut down and start up repeatedly over the course of a day.

The real question is why we are building any fossil fuel plants at all, and the answer is simple, they have immense lobbying power and vast full spectrum media campaigns that they use to prevent entirely viable existing alternatives from being built.

[–] Successful_Try543@feddit.org 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Don't forget people:
NIMBYs who protest against the Verspargelung of the landscape in case a new wind power plant is planned to be constructed. People protesting against roads being built through the 'beautiful' fir monoculture they use to call forrest. Some esoteric aunts who feel the water adder in their home being disrupted or fear 'electro smog', infrasound or drop shadow. Or environmentalists who are afraid that some bird will be shred to pieces. Eliminating all these concerns or ensuring improvement takes endless time and money.

Is a company builds a new fossil power plant as a replacement next to an existing one, everybody is happy because it's supposed to be cleaner. Sure, some environmentalists will also find that the habitat of an endangered species is going to be destroyed. But then the company can create a replacement somewhere near and the concerns of the environmentalists are relieved.