←back to thread

131 points mg | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.227s | source
Show context
zizee ◴[] No.26598033[source]
I think the future will be robust national/international grids, with a mixture of storage options (batteries/pumped hydro) to smooth out the intermittent nature of wind and solar.

Cynics always talk about the amount of energy storage required for solar as if you need to store 24 hours of energy for solar/wind to be viable.

I'd like to see numbers on having 1 hour of storage for peak demand, a robust national grid, and appropriately provisioned and placed solar and wind, taking the duck curve into consideration.

replies(6): >>26598222 #>>26598329 #>>26598526 #>>26598746 #>>26599340 #>>26599508 #
manfredo ◴[] No.26598222[source]
Even achieving just one hour of storage globally amounts to 2.5 TWh of storage. By comparison the entire world produces ~300 GWh worth of lithium ion battery annually. That leaves geographically limited options like pumped hydroelectricity, and solutions not yet deployed at any significant scale like hydrogen fuel cells, synthetic methane, thermal batteries, flywheels, etc.

Realistically we should saturate daytime energy demand with solar, and if there aren't any scalable storage options by then switch gears and proceed with hydroelectric where it's viable and nuclear where it's not.

replies(7): >>26598287 #>>26598427 #>>26598481 #>>26598549 #>>26598594 #>>26598763 #>>26599062 #
pydry ◴[] No.26598481[source]
>Even achieving just one hour of storage globally amounts to 2.5 TWh of storage. By comparison the entire world produces ~300 GWh worth of lithium ion battery

What's the point of this comparison?

Lithium ion batteries are probably the least cost effective means of dealing with intermittency. It's also rare that the entire world is without wind and sun simultaneously.

In terms of cost:

Demand shaping < overproduction < pumped storage < < lithium ion batteries

replies(1): >>26598979 #
Manfredo_1 ◴[] No.26598979[source]
"Demand shaping" is a nice euphemism for energy shortages. And if we demand shaping we're just externalizing the cost to consumers that need to buy their own energy storage or change their energy usage patterns to accommodate the unreliable supply.

Overproduction helps but doesn't eliminate intermittency. And pumped hydroelectricity is geographically dependent. The irony is that most places with extensive hydroelectric storage potential don't need wind and solar in the first place because they get their energy from hydroelectric generation.

replies(4): >>26599023 #>>26599033 #>>26599617 #>>26601431 #
1. pydry ◴[] No.26601431[source]
>Demand shaping" is a nice euphemism for energy shortages.

It's a euphemism for storage heaters, storage air-conditioning, aluminium smelters that dial usage up and down and smart car chargers.

Lithium ion batteries are useful too, of course, but they cost more.

This is a problem where market based solutions shine. The only reason that fact isn't getting rammed down our throats by lobbyists is that the people who got religion about markets tended to be oil/gas people, who have since been thrashing the "renewables are unreliable" drum.

>Overproduction helps but doesn't eliminate intermittency.

Why should the goal be to eliminate it when we can adapt to it and thrive?

Personally, I'm more excited for applications of periodic free/-ve priced electricity than I am worried about shortages.