Hydrogen, heat sand batteries, gravity batteries, etc. There’s plenty of clean options. Really just depends on the use case.
I doubt that. That’s TWhs of storage, unfeasable with todays technologies unless you’ve the geography for pumped storage.
Meh. plenty of storage options, sodium ion batteries being a cheaper one. Having more energy than you need is a good problem to have.
Having more energy than you need is a good problem to have.
For buyers, yes. For sellers, no.
So much of the “we need more energy storage!” guys are ultimately in the market of creating a bottleneck they can exploit. The solution of nuclear as a base load and orienting industrial/commercial needs around peak solar/wind generation isn’t appealing to a business that can make $3000/Mwh selling onto the ERCOT grid during a demand crunch.
And that’s the problem we need renewables to solve. As long as the price can be pushed skywards as soon as there is no wind, reactors will unfortunately have to be brought offline for emergency maintenance or somesuch.
But the solution we need isn’t as limited as regular batteries, regardless of chemistry. We need more. Much more. And that’s the challenge. If we can’t store electricity, we need to store something that easily can be turned into electricity or, worsr case, store it as something that can reduce the need of electricity.
The way it’s going: it’s going to be natural gas.
Well, it won’t take much to disrupt big oil. I understand that they are trying. Norway is lost, most of Europe is leaning away and oil prices are going down. Just a little bit more and production outside OPEC wount be profitable any longer…
I’m not talking good side ™ vs bad side ™.
I’m talking technical feasability.
Me neither, I’m talking economics. Can’t do business if there is none.
As long as the price can be pushed skywards as soon as there is no wind
It’s more the reverse. Prices plummeting because there’s too much wind. Suddenly you’re hitting the brakes on gas and coal, even when demand is rising. Nobody in the energy industry wants electricity that is virtually free at point of sale.
And that’s the challenge. If we can’t store electricity, we need to store something that easily can be turned into electricity or, worsr case, store it as something that can reduce the need of electricity.
There’s at least a vague possibility of a future in which all the cheap solar/wind energy can be used for energy intensive decarbonization projects. But that requires a state willing to expend money on the effort, as individuals can’t be sold “retail climate change reduction” at any significant volume.
Implementing a project like this would require a political class eager to confront both the cartel that is the fossil fuel industry and the long-term ecological threat that is climate change. And we’ve got a bunch of 70-year-olds with throat cancer lining up to hold down the ostensibly-liberal minority government right now. So things aren’t looking great on that front.
State level isn’t where it’s at. And not climate change either. This is now a question of business continuity. How will your local government function if suddenly there is no oil, be it import blockade or lack of demand? Or if the bad neighbour invades your country?
Decarbonation isn’t a goal in and of itself at this point, but being able to run the local government for months on end with disrupted energy delivery is a goal. And that goal demands local energy production and local energy storage. Sun, wind and wood are the best sources for local energy in the winter. Add a battery pack to squeeze out those last sun rays to keep going a wee bit longer after sundown.
Sure, a diesel engine is the quick fix, but it requires refuelling every other day and even a small restriction, like a strategic mine field, will hamper delivery badly enough to potentially cause a crisis.
