• kaffiene@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    What? You don’t have Google? Options I know of (other than batteries and pumped hydro) : Compressed Air Energy Storage, Thermal Energy Storage, Fly wheels, Hydrogen, Supercapacitors, Gravitational Storage

    • fellowmortal@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      The fact that you descend into complete science fiction should give you pause for thought. I doubt it will, but please think about how fantastical your proposed solutions are - “a massive lake of molten salt under every city” (I actually like that one!)…

      • kaffiene@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Given you’re making up things I never said I can only imagine what you’re respinding to? Where did a massive lake of molten salt under every city come from?

        • fellowmortal@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Sorry this is a late reply. I can see that mentioning molten salt was a bit left-field, However, it is one of the more realistic ways to store the huge amounts of power needed to fuel an economy for a couple of weeks (which you need in northern europe if you want to use solar/wind). Here’s a link about it:

          https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cite.202000137

          I am pro nuclear, but if we are going to descend into this renewable hell, then we need to actually think about how you store terawatt-hours of power. I really think that this kind of storage might be the nearest we have to a solution. we’ll only need it once we try to turn off the gas turbines, of course. It is fascinating that so many smart people don’t see that the whole jigsaw is missing vital pieces.

          • pufferfisherpowder@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            What might be the nearest solution to a nuclear reactor design they doesn’t go over budget, doesn’t get delayed decades, and doesn’t produce radioactive waste for which we don’t have a final storage solution anywhere* on the entire planet?

            *I didn’t recently check if the storage in Finland is up an running yet.

    • someacnt_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago
      1. It’s not easy to go over all options.
      2. Many of these are largely theoretical, or for temporary storage. For instance, I don’t think fluwheels can store energy for months.
      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Nobody wants energy stored for months. Whatever storage is used needs to get through temporary decreases in efficiency. In places that use solar, that means from one afternoon to the next morning. In places that use wind, it means until the wind picks up. We’re talking storage on the order of tens of hours at the most.

      • kaffiene@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Are you proposing that the sun may not shine and the wind not blow anywhere at all for months?

        • someacnt_@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah, it is like that in some places. Also solar flux vary a lot by seasons as well. Dunno if wind has as much of an issue, but surely not great.