• 17 Posts
  • 233 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle












  • Mostly because natural gas is a one and done thing when it is used. Batteries can be recycled. Production of natural gas is largely done through racking which destroys the groundwater. While batteries often require mining (excluding mechanical ones), they often can be broken down and reused in new batteries. And of course there is the greenhouse gas emissions from methane that are horrible. Methane is extremely leaky. Methane usage emits about as much greenhouse gas emissions as coal does.


  • You know what pumped storage hydro is? A battery. Unfortunately that is not an option everywhere and takes up a massive amount of space. The space portion is not a huge issue for grid energy storage for the most part but it can definitely limit where you can do it and its capacity.

    As for the amount of lithium available, there is absolutely more than enough considering it is one of the most abundant materials on our planet. Not that we need to use lithium for grid energy storage. Lithium is very high density energy storage which you are correct that is not a high priority for grid energy storage.

    Basically there is no one solution for grid energy storage. There are mechanical batteries, medium density chemical batteries, and even “depleted” EV batteries. We just need to apply what is right for each particular scenario.

    I’m not disagreeing with you overall. But I figured more info and context is helpful.









  • The $100+ billion per year comes from an analysis of Sanders’ Medicare for All plan by the libertarian think tank Cato Institute. So basically the worst case scenario that is very unlikely.

    The $7 tax vs $10 date insurance is hypothetical to make a point. But if you want a real world example, you can compare our largely private system with countries that have socialized systems. 19% of our GDP goes towards healthcare costs vs 11-12% how other developed countries. So if we had something like theirs, most people would get a 10% raise in their income.

    It would not be Medicare for All nor a better deal if people could simply opt out. Republicans would simply whittle it down to being worthless otherwise.