Yeah, I think massive chemical batteries for storing excess electricity to facilitate a contrived green energy market is a bad idea.

  • Yggstyle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    Find an engineer or an engineering channel to better understand the grid. Energy generation - clean or otherwise - has to be adjusted in realtime… further: the above statement doesn’t clearly understand or solve for over generation vs under generation. There’s a fix: a reservoir. In other words: storage. This (storage) is present everywhere from the grid to almost literally every circuit board.

    You’re picking a fight with batteries/energy storage - then making an argument about something unrelated. “Storing cooked beef sure is hard” is not properly solved with “the store stocking more beef.” They are tangentially related… but not the same thing.

    edit: clarity / punctuation

    • Rivalarrival
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      further: the above statement doesn’t clearly understand or solve for over generation vs under generation.

      Filling a reservoir during the day to run a steel mill overnight is a complete waste of a reservoir: move the steel mill to daytime hours and you don’t need the reservoir.

      And yet, we are doing this now: We are driving consumption to overnight hours that can’t possibly be met by solar. We are offering cheap “off peak” power, and incentivizing overnight consumption.

      We do have good reason for it: we need that excess overnight demand to improve the efficiency of our base load generation. But, those same incentives are killing solar/wind efficiency and artificially increasing the need for storage.

      Yes, we need storage to match the imbalance between generation and demand. But it is far more important that we minimize that imbalance first.

      Shifting demand to time of production (demand shaping) is much more efficient than shifting production to time of demand (storage).

      OP’s position is rather ludicrous for a number of reasons, but they are not wrong on this particular point.

    • gens@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7G4ipM2qjfw

      OP is… trying his best, I guess. For now lipo is the best solution. Actually multiple things are the solution. Pumped water has a delay that needs to be covered by something else. Flywheels have mechanical chalenges. Molten salt also has problems. Etc. They all compliment each other. IMO best single solution would be nuclear. Salt will be better then lithium, but in some years.

      When batteries (ahcually accumulators, but whatever) are done properly, the fires should not go beyond one cell, if at all.

      PS Gravity, except pumped water, is hilariously bad.

      • Yggstyle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        OP is… trying his best, I guess.

        I commend your faith in … ehm… the human spirit we’ll say.

        PS Gravity, except pumped water, is hilariously bad.

        Keenly aware. I got a good laugh out of it when I saw it mentioned.

        Practical Engineering is great. He does a fantastic job of explaining things simply and frequently provides models to demonstrate things.

        100% on the combination of things statement. Many different storage mediums have different advantages and disadvantages. The right tool for the right job. Flawed though it is I always loved reading about molten salt… It just seemed like such a metal way to store energy. 😂

        Realistically - I don’t mind people being incorrect or even just leaning into their particular beliefs or preferences… but OP emphatically stating incorrect information and then arguing as people corrected him was irritating.