Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Renewable energy will soon be 25% of US energy supply. Only 75% to go   (insideclimatenews.org) divider line
45
    More: Spiffy, Renewable energy, new government report, Wind power, Petroleum, much energy buildings waste, Energy Information Administration, solar power, International Energy Agency  
•       •       •

318 clicks; posted to STEM » on 19 Jan 2023 at 1:35 PM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



45 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
make me some tea [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-01-19 12:54:36 PM  
We're almost there, folks! Another several decades and we'll be at 75%, maybe.
 
yohohogreengiant [TotalFark]
2023-01-19 1:30:24 PM  
Compare to the subsidies it receives vs fossil fuel
 
Pants full of macaroni!! [BareFark]
2023-01-19 1:49:01 PM  
B-B-B-BUT TEH KOMMUNISMUS!!!1!
 
markie_farkie [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-01-19 1:51:54 PM  
Ultimately all energy is renewable.. The cycle might be half a billion years for all of our carbon dioxide, plastics, and other waste to turn back into a fuel source, but it'll happen.

Now go fire up that Coalburner 10,000,000 lifted truck and scream YEEEEEHAWWWW as you barrel down the highway, belching thick black smoke everywhere while the bed spills plastic bottles and grocery bags onto the landscape.

You're saving the future planet.
 
xanadian [TotalFark]
2023-01-19 2:11:02 PM  
Slow and steady wins the race.

/unless you're too slow...
 
ImpendingCynic
2023-01-19 2:15:44 PM  
Damn, now Republicans will blow up the sun.
 
stuhayes2010
2023-01-19 2:16:48 PM  

yohohogreengiant: Compare to the subsidies it receives vs fossil fuel


Subsidies make it cheaper, not less productive.  Oil and Coal also get subsides and oil is the most profitable substance ever pulled from the earth.
 
maniacbastard
2023-01-19 2:22:14 PM  
How will we fight wars for the Sun?
 
jso2897
2023-01-19 2:28:39 PM  

yohohogreengiant: Compare to the subsidies it receives vs fossil fuel


But that would require engaging in a mental function, and it's so much easier to make snarky jokes about how things can never change because we are all so stupid.
 
E_Henry_Thripshaws_Disease
2023-01-19 2:30:51 PM  
not if the GQP and Exxon and Munchkin have their way
 
Obscene_CNN
2023-01-19 2:31:00 PM  
Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.
 
WoodyHayes [OhFark]
2023-01-19 2:31:19 PM  
Soon like "Soccer will be America's sport in twenty or thirty years" soon?
 
Carter Pewterschmidt [TotalFark]
2023-01-19 3:06:55 PM  

Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.


That's where nuclear should come in. Plus there are already alternative energy storage systems. Pumped water for one, the UK has a large one in a mountain in Wales. Flywheel storage has potential (pun intended). Sand heat storage looks promising for many uses.
 
make me some tea [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-01-19 3:21:05 PM  

Obscene_CNN: Battery storage is a pipe dream.


https://www.energy-storage.news/market-segments/grid-scale/
 
Craw Fu
2023-01-19 4:30:48 PM  
Yay, progress.
 
covfefe [TotalFark]
2023-01-19 4:51:34 PM  

Obscene_CNN: bacause


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
jake3988 [OhFark]
2023-01-19 5:31:48 PM  
Looks like they're excluding nuclear (which makes sense, it's not renewable) but it's also not a fossil fuel.

I have a lot of qualms with nuclear but it's much better than fossil fuels.  We should focus and celebrate any success of something that isn't a fossil fuel.

Sounds to me like it's 24+19 = 43%.  That sounds much better, doesn't it?

/I also wonder what they consider things like wood pellets and methane capture.  Both are probably very small in the grand scheme of things and both essentially rely on waste from other processes (the former is waste wood from lumber companies and the latter is typically capturing it from garbage).  Scaling them up would defeat the purpose.
//Also saw some videos on wave energy capture.  Would be cool if we could scale that up and be economical.  Would only likely work for the coast and the west coast at that (no hurricanes to worry about), but hey, a good number of people live there.  It would be worth it.
 
Tannhauser
2023-01-19 5:36:20 PM  
This is great and all, but if the sun goes out what do we do then?
 
Dinjiin [BareFark]
2023-01-19 5:55:46 PM  

Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.


There is no technical impediment to sourcing all our power from renewables.  You can do it with the proper deployment of generation, transmission, and storage.  It just comes down to cost, land use, and planning.

That said, US energy policy currently calls for 100% carbon-free power by 2035, not 100% renewable power.  Nuclear is going to play a role.

Pumped hydro storage is much cheaper than battery storage and is seen as the preferred intra-day load-balancing method.  There are a couple of projects in design stage in California that will offset the state's need for gas peaker plants.
 
dv-ous [TotalFark]
2023-01-19 6:14:01 PM  

Tannhauser: This is great and all, but if the sun goes out what do we do then?


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
make me some tea [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-01-19 8:23:07 PM  
REPORT | 2023
Peak Fossil Fuel Demand for Electricity
It's all over except the shouting
 
raygundan
2023-01-19 9:04:07 PM  

Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.


Which sun do you live near that doesn't shine all the time?
 
Nonpo
2023-01-19 9:12:03 PM  

Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.


That's what nuclear and hydro are for. (Fusion too once they figure it out). Battery storage isn't a pipe dream it's highly practical because we are putting a shiat ton of batteries into service on EVs and vehicle to grid standards are right around the corner which will allow the cars to act as batteries for the grid.
 
2fardownthread [recently expired TotalFark]
2023-01-19 10:06:03 PM  
OK. I get that the purpose of the article is to cheer for the team and deliver the good news, so I won't talk to the people who just want to feel good. Go do that.

What bothers me with renewable energy reporting is what gets glossed over. Look closely at the vocabulary. Article says... 25% of generation... well. What is that? How is that calculated? Is it relevant?

Is it the nameplate capacity, which is simply the MAXIMUM that a generator can produce? Because, if so, solar hits that maximum like twice a year for 15 minutes. Wind gets there for a few days a year. Nuclear and coal might never get there, but they get close, and they are steadily useful.

Or is it what is ACTUALLY generated? That is first of all difficult to calculate because people who have rooftop solar generate and use a lot of juice. It never makes it to the grid. And, very sadly, but truly truly, a lot of generated renewable is simply tossed away and never used. It is unexpected and therefore not as useful. It just gets wasted... much much more than baseload coal or nuclear.

And for that matter, what is the denominator? It happened in Japan that the percentage of renewables spiked several years ago, but mainly because everyone cut their consumption by 10 to 20%. And the percentage of nuclear obviously dropped to zero.

I mean, yay and all that, but going by the math and counting that SEEMS to be implied, we are going to need more than 100% renewable to satisfy 100% of our needs or wants. If you don't pay attention to the counting and how people actually use electricity, then that great 25% number will deceive you into thinking that 100% is the goal.

I am an "overbuild and curtail" renewables fan, and my recommendation is that we need to shoot for about 200% generation capability of renewables and/or serious changes to lifestyles.
 
AppleOptionEsc
2023-01-19 11:42:11 PM  

markie_farkie: Ultimately all energy is renewable.. The cycle might be half a billion years for all of our carbon dioxide, plastics, and other waste to turn back into a fuel source, but it'll happen.

Now go fire up that Coalburner 10,000,000 lifted truck and scream YEEEEEHAWWWW as you barrel down the highway, belching thick black smoke everywhere while the bed spills plastic bottles and grocery bags onto the landscape.

You're saving the future planet.


Wasn't oil/coal only possible because microbes hadn't developed yet to break down the cell walls of plants and phytoplankton?

Seems unlikely those would go away again to let plant matter build up again.
 
Farkage
2023-01-20 7:35:44 AM  

Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
Obscene_CNN
2023-01-20 11:26:13 AM  

Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.

There is no technical impediment to sourcing all our power from renewables.  You can do it with the proper deployment of generation, transmission, and storage.  It just comes down to cost, land use, and planning.

That said, US energy policy currently calls for 100% carbon-free power by 2035, not 100% renewable power.  Nuclear is going to play a role.

Pumped hydro storage is much cheaper than battery storage and is seen as the preferred intra-day load-balancing method.  There are a couple of projects in design stage in California that will offset the state's need for gas peaker plants.


You have to have water to do pumped hydro storage and lithium ion batteries are only good for about 10 years at best.

Also
Quick explanation of challenges of going 100% solar in California
Youtube Sq9Uq1DqhU8
 
Dinjiin [BareFark]
2023-01-20 3:21:58 PM  

Obscene_CNN: Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.

There is no technical impediment to sourcing all our power from renewables.  You can do it with the proper deployment of generation, transmission, and storage.  It just comes down to cost, land use, and planning.

That said, US energy policy currently calls for 100% carbon-free power by 2035, not 100% renewable power.  Nuclear is going to play a role.

Pumped hydro storage is much cheaper than battery storage and is seen as the preferred intra-day load-balancing method.  There are a couple of projects in design stage in California that will offset the state's need for gas peaker plants.

You have to have water to do pumped hydro storage and lithium ion batteries are only good for about 10 years at best.

Also
[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/Sq9Uq1DqhU8]


So the goal for the US and California is 100% carbon-free energy and you decide to post a video about California going 100% solar using in-state generation, which omits how nuclear, hydro, wind (on-shore and off-shore), geothermal, tidal, and out-of-state sources could complement solar.

Also, the video doesn't disprove that 100% solar is unachievable, only that it would be very difficult.

Utility scale flow batteries can last up to 30 years.  Pumped storage only needs to deal with evaporation losses once filled, assuming an open-air system.  Lifted and rail gravity batteries need no water at all.
 
Obscene_CNN
2023-01-20 4:01:54 PM  

Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.

There is no technical impediment to sourcing all our power from renewables.  You can do it with the proper deployment of generation, transmission, and storage.  It just comes down to cost, land use, and planning.

That said, US energy policy currently calls for 100% carbon-free power by 2035, not 100% renewable power.  Nuclear is going to play a role.

Pumped hydro storage is much cheaper than battery storage and is seen as the preferred intra-day load-balancing method.  There are a couple of projects in design stage in California that will offset the state's need for gas peaker plants.

You have to have water to do pumped hydro storage and lithium ion batteries are only good for about 10 years at best.

Also
[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/Sq9Uq1DqhU8]

So the goal for the US and California is 100% carbon-free energy and you decide to post a video about California going 100% solar using in-state generation, which omits how nuclear, hydro, wind (on-shore and off-shore), geothermal, tidal, and out-of-state sources could complement solar.

Also, the video doesn't disprove that 100% solar is unachievable, only that it would be very difficult.

Utility scale flow batteries can last up to 30 years.  Pumped storage only needs to deal with evaporation losses once filled, assuming an open-air system.  Lifted and rail gravity batteries need no water at all.


So now you are hyping the gravity battery scam...
Energy Vault: MEGA-BUSTED!
Youtube XxGQgAr4OCo
 
Dinjiin [BareFark]
2023-01-20 6:48:22 PM  

Obscene_CNN: Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.

There is no technical impediment to sourcing all our power from renewables.  You can do it with the proper deployment of generation, transmission, and storage.  It just comes down to cost, land use, and planning.

That said, US energy policy currently calls for 100% carbon-free power by 2035, not 100% renewable power.  Nuclear is going to play a role.

Pumped hydro storage is much cheaper than battery storage and is seen as the preferred intra-day load-balancing method.  There are a couple of projects in design stage in California that will offset the state's need for gas peaker plants.

You have to have water to do pumped hydro storage and lithium ion batteries are only good for about 10 years at best.

Also
[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/Sq9Uq1DqhU8]

So the goal for the US and California is 100% carbon-free energy and you decide to post a video about California going 100% solar using in-state generation, which omits how nuclear, hydro, wind (on-shore and off-shore), geothermal, tidal, and out-of-state sources could complement solar.

Also, the video doesn't disprove that 100% solar is unachievable, only that it would be very difficult.

Utility scale flow batteries can last up to 30 years.  Pumped storage only needs to deal with evaporation losses once filled, assuming an open-air system.  Lifted and rail gravity batteries need no water at all.

So now you are hyping the gravity battery scam...
[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/XxGQgAr4OCo]


There is no exaggeration or ploy in that last sentence, so no, not hyping.

Also, you avoided responding to everything else because, as usual, you're wrong.
 
raygundan
2023-01-20 7:15:32 PM  

Obscene_CNN: Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.

There is no technical impediment to sourcing all our power from renewables.  You can do it with the proper deployment of generation, transmission, and storage.  It just comes down to cost, land use, and planning.

That said, US energy policy currently calls for 100% carbon-free power by 2035, not 100% renewable power.  Nuclear is going to play a role.

Pumped hydro storage is much cheaper than battery storage and is seen as the preferred intra-day load-balancing method.  There are a couple of projects in design stage in California that will offset the state's need for gas peaker plants.

You have to have water to do pumped hydro storage and lithium ion batteries are only good for about 10 years at best.

Also
[YouTube video: Quick explanation of challenges of going 100% solar in California]


That's weird- I have lithium ion batteries more than ten years old that still work. But it can't be that you're misinformed- you're usually so on-the-ball!
 
Obscene_CNN
2023-01-20 7:23:21 PM  

Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.

There is no technical impediment to sourcing all our power from renewables.  You can do it with the proper deployment of generation, transmission, and storage.  It just comes down to cost, land use, and planning.

That said, US energy policy currently calls for 100% carbon-free power by 2035, not 100% renewable power.  Nuclear is going to play a role.

Pumped hydro storage is much cheaper than battery storage and is seen as the preferred intra-day load-balancing method.  There are a couple of projects in design stage in California that will offset the state's need for gas peaker plants.

You have to have water to do pumped hydro storage and lithium ion batteries are only good for about 10 years at best.

Also
[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/Sq9Uq1DqhU8]

So the goal for the US and California is 100% carbon-free energy and you decide to post a video about California going 100% solar using in-state generation, which omits how nuclear, hydro, wind (on-shore and off-shore), geothermal, tidal, and out-of-state sources could complement solar.

Also, the video doesn't disprove that 100% solar is unachievable, only that it would be very difficult.

Utility scale flow batteries can last up to 30 years.  Pumped storage only needs to deal with evaporation losses once filled, assuming an open-air system.  Lifted and rail gravity batteries need no water at all.

So now you are hyping the gravity battery scam...
[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/XxGQgAr4OCo]

There is no exaggeration or ploy in that last sentence, so no, not hyping.

Also, you avoided responding to everything else because, as usual, you're wrong.


Lets see your proof lithium ion batteries can last 30 years in grid scale applications. In grid scale applications its going to be operated in deep discharge repeatedly. This will severely limit lifespan.  Note: I have designed battery backed solar for remote systems as well as worked for a utility with wind, hydro, solar, and nuclear. Battery backed grid power is a joke.

https://www.uetechnologies.com/how-long-does-a-lithium-ion-battery-last/
 
Obscene_CNN
2023-01-20 7:36:19 PM  

raygundan: Obscene_CNN: Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.

There is no technical impediment to sourcing all our power from renewables.  You can do it with the proper deployment of generation, transmission, and storage.  It just comes down to cost, land use, and planning.

That said, US energy policy currently calls for 100% carbon-free power by 2035, not 100% renewable power.  Nuclear is going to play a role.

Pumped hydro storage is much cheaper than battery storage and is seen as the preferred intra-day load-balancing method.  There are a couple of projects in design stage in California that will offset the state's need for gas peaker plants.

You have to have water to do pumped hydro storage and lithium ion batteries are only good for about 10 years at best.

Also
[YouTube video: Quick explanation of challenges of going 100% solar in California]

That's weird- I have lithium ion batteries more than ten years old that still work. But it can't be that you're misinformed- you're usually so on-the-ball!


If you shallow discharge them with low current you can get them to last longer. Systems I have designed that are in the field that are 17 years old right now with working lithium cells. But the demand of a realtime clock vs a car or backing the grid are totally different.
 
raygundan
2023-01-20 7:53:38 PM  

Obscene_CNN: raygundan: Obscene_CNN: Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.

There is no technical impediment to sourcing all our power from renewables.  You can do it with the proper deployment of generation, transmission, and storage.  It just comes down to cost, land use, and planning.

That said, US energy policy currently calls for 100% carbon-free power by 2035, not 100% renewable power.  Nuclear is going to play a role.

Pumped hydro storage is much cheaper than battery storage and is seen as the preferred intra-day load-balancing method.  There are a couple of projects in design stage in California that will offset the state's need for gas peaker plants.

You have to have water to do pumped hydro storage and lithium ion batteries are only good for about 10 years at best.

Also
[YouTube video: Quick explanation of challenges of going 100% solar in California]

That's weird- I have lithium ion batteries more than ten years old that still work. But it can't be that you're misinformed- you're usually so on-the-ball!

If you shallow discharge them with low current you can get them to last longer. Systems I have designed that are in the field that are 17 years old right now with working lithium cells. But the demand of a realtime clock vs a car or backing the grid are totally different.


Agreed. Grid applications are easier- you get predictable cycles and don't have the size limitations a car would, so it's easy to avoid repeated deep discharges. You can design with enough capacity to stay in the "happy place" without ending up with a car too heavy to move, because it's not a car.

That said... one of the lithium-ion batteries I've had that went past ten *is* in a car, and has been deep discharged at high current about twice per day for its entire life. It had more than 80% of original capacity left when I sold it.
 
Obscene_CNN
2023-01-20 8:26:09 PM  

raygundan: Obscene_CNN: raygundan: Obscene_CNN: Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.

There is no technical impediment to sourcing all our power from renewables.  You can do it with the proper deployment of generation, transmission, and storage.  It just comes down to cost, land use, and planning.

That said, US energy policy currently calls for 100% carbon-free power by 2035, not 100% renewable power.  Nuclear is going to play a role.

Pumped hydro storage is much cheaper than battery storage and is seen as the preferred intra-day load-balancing method.  There are a couple of projects in design stage in California that will offset the state's need for gas peaker plants.

You have to have water to do pumped hydro storage and lithium ion batteries are only good for about 10 years at best.

Also
[YouTube video: Quick explanation of challenges of going 100% solar in California]

That's weird- I have lithium ion batteries more than ten years old that still work. But it can't be that you're misinformed- you're usually so on-the-ball!

If you shallow discharge them with low current you can get them to last longer. Systems I have designed that are in the field that are 17 years old right now with working lithium cells. But the demand of a realtime clock vs a car or backing the grid are totally different.

Agreed. Grid applications are easier- you get predictable cycles and don't have the size limitations a car would, so it's easy to avoid repeated deep discharges. You can design with enough capacity to stay in the "happy place" without ending up with a car too heavy to move, because it's not a car.

That said... one of the lithium-ion batteries I've had that went past ten *is* in a car, and has been deep discharged at high current about twice per day for its entire life. It had more than 80% of original capacity left when I sold ...


You won't have enough lithium to meet the demand. Child labor can only mine so much.  When you look at the capacity required you will see shallow cycling is not an option. Then consider how EV mandates will increase the load and demand for batteries.
 
raygundan
2023-01-20 8:52:53 PM  

Obscene_CNN: raygundan: Obscene_CNN: raygundan: Obscene_CNN: Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Can't do 100% bacause renewables can't provide a reliable base load. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. Battery storage is a pipe dream.

There is no technical impediment to sourcing all our power from renewables.  You can do it with the proper deployment of generation, transmission, and storage.  It just comes down to cost, land use, and planning.

That said, US energy policy currently calls for 100% carbon-free power by 2035, not 100% renewable power.  Nuclear is going to play a role.

Pumped hydro storage is much cheaper than battery storage and is seen as the preferred intra-day load-balancing method.  There are a couple of projects in design stage in California that will offset the state's need for gas peaker plants.

You have to have water to do pumped hydro storage and lithium ion batteries are only good for about 10 years at best.

Also
[YouTube video: Quick explanation of challenges of going 100% solar in California]

That's weird- I have lithium ion batteries more than ten years old that still work. But it can't be that you're misinformed- you're usually so on-the-ball!

If you shallow discharge them with low current you can get them to last longer. Systems I have designed that are in the field that are 17 years old right now with working lithium cells. But the demand of a realtime clock vs a car or backing the grid are totally different.

Agreed. Grid applications are easier- you get predictable cycles and don't have the size limitations a car would, so it's easy to avoid repeated deep discharges. You can design with enough capacity to stay in the "happy place" without ending up with a car too heavy to move, because it's not a car.

That said... one of the lithium-ion batteries I've had that went past ten *is* in a car, and has been deep discharged at high current about twice per day for its entire life. It had more than 80% of original capacity left when I sold ...

You won't have enough lithium to meet the demand. Child labor can only mine so much.  When you look at the capacity required you will see shallow cycling is not an option. Then consider how EV mandates will increase the load and demand for batteries.


Fortunately, lithium is far from the only option for energy storage. But you knew that... you just like to be a twit on the internet for reasons I can't begin to fathom.
 
Obscene_CNN
2023-01-20 9:14:16 PM  

raygundan: Agreed. Grid applications are easier- you get predictable cycles and don't have the size limitations a car would, so it's easy to avoid repeated deep discharges. You can design with enough capacity to stay in the "happy place" without ending up with a car too heavy to move, because it's not a car.

That said... one of the lithium-ion batteries I've had that went past ten *is* in a car, and has been deep discharged at high current about twice per day for its entire life. It had more than 80% of original capacity left when I sold ...

You won't have enough lithium to meet the demand. Child labor can only mine so much. When you look at the capacity required you will see shallow cycling is not an option. Then consider how EV mandates will increase the load and demand for batteries.

Fortunately, lithium is far from the only option for energy storage. But you knew that... you just like to be a twit on the internet for reasons I can't begin to fathom.


Pumped hydro is the only other viable option for storage and there is limited places geologically you can do it no to mention you need an abundance of water.  All others are too inefficient to be considered or can't scale to meet demand.
 
raygundan
2023-01-20 9:16:02 PM  

Obscene_CNN: Pumped hydro is the only other viable option for storage


Oh, okay... so not actually going to have a fact-based discussion, then.
 
Dinjiin [BareFark]
2023-01-20 9:19:55 PM  

Dinjiin: Utility scale flow batteries can last up to 30 years.

Obscene_CNN: Lets see your proof lithium ion batteries can last 30 years in grid scale applications.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
Obscene_CNN
2023-01-20 9:36:37 PM  

raygundan: Obscene_CNN: Pumped hydro is the only other viable option for storage

Oh, okay... so not actually going to have a fact-based discussion, then.


Are you planning to use lead acid?  That won't work well and the environmentalists won't let you do it.

Molten sand? yes you can store heat in it but it doesn't conduct heat well and you can't extract it efficiently.

Compressed gas? Irreversibilties kill efficiency.
 
Obscene_CNN
2023-01-20 10:34:27 PM  

Dinjiin: Dinjiin: Utility scale flow batteries can last up to 30 years.
Obscene_CNN: Lets see your proof lithium ion batteries can last 30 years in grid scale applications.

[Fark user image 640x480]


"all flow batteries suffer from inferior cycle energy efficiency (50-80%) compared to lithium-ion batteries. "

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_battery
 
raygundan
2023-01-20 11:01:34 PM  

Obscene_CNN: raygundan: Obscene_CNN: Pumped hydro is the only other viable option for storage

Oh, okay... so not actually going to have a fact-based discussion, then.

Are you planning to use lead acid?  That won't work well and the environmentalists won't let you do it.

Molten sand? yes you can store heat in it but it doesn't conduct heat well and you can't extract it efficiently.

Compressed gas? Irreversibilties kill efficiency.


Dried leaves?  I don't even know how you'd store energy in those, but they're bad at it.

Poetry?  It's not even really an energy source.  It is reversible, but it's rarely still a poem then.

Lasagna?  It's workable, but it's entirely too expensive for the limited amount of energy you get back.

Feral cats?  High energy density, but serious issues with storage and handling.

Frozen lava?  Turns out this is just rocks, and it takes a lot of energy input to re-melt them, so it's not net-positive.
 
Befuddled
2023-01-21 12:10:16 AM  

Obscene_CNN: "all flow batteries suffer from inferior cycle energy efficiency (50-80%) compared to lithium-ion batteries. "

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_battery


There are more considerations than just the one you mention. If all you want is the best battery available, then it's likely going to be a silver-zinc battery but that's ignoring the high cost.

Nickel-hydrogen batteries were used in satellites for a long time even though they had a high self-discharge rate because their other attributes made up for that deficiency.

In short, there is almost never a perfect solution.
 
Dinjiin [BareFark]
2023-01-21 1:05:11 AM  

Obscene_CNN: Dinjiin: Dinjiin: Utility scale flow batteries can last up to 30 years.
Obscene_CNN: Lets see your proof lithium ion batteries can last 30 years in grid scale applications.

[Fark user image 640x480]

"all flow batteries suffer from inferior cycle energy efficiency (50-80%) compared to lithium-ion batteries. "

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_battery


So now you're just throwing random crap to save face?  Sure, I'll bite.

Vanadium flow batteries have an efficiency rate of 70% to 85%.  Li-ion batteries have an efficiency rate of 85% to 95%.  However, Li-ion batteries require more cooling than vanadium flow batteries, so their effective efficiency rates are similar.  Pumped hydro also had an efficiency rate of 70% to 85%, FYI.  For large utility scale projects, the TCO for VFBs and Li-ion batteries is similar.  And being a more immature product, the cost of flow batteries has much more room to fall over the next decade.

Still waiting for you answer why it is technically impossible to have a grid powered by either 100% renewables or 100% carbon-free sources.
 
Obscene_CNN
2023-01-21 1:09:26 AM  

Dinjiin: Obscene_CNN: Dinjiin: Dinjiin: Utility scale flow batteries can last up to 30 years.
Obscene_CNN: Lets see your proof lithium ion batteries can last 30 years in grid scale applications.

[Fark user image 640x480]

"all flow batteries suffer from inferior cycle energy efficiency (50-80%) compared to lithium-ion batteries. "

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_battery

So now you're just throwing random crap to save face?  Sure, I'll bite.

Vanadium flow batteries have an efficiency rate of 70% to 85%.  Li-ion batteries have an efficiency rate of 85% to 95%.  However, Li-ion batteries require more cooling than vanadium flow batteries, so their effective efficiency rates are similar.  Pumped hydro also had an efficiency rate of 70% to 85%, FYI.  For large utility scale projects, the TCO for VFBs and Li-ion batteries is similar.  And being a more immature product, the cost of flow batteries has much more room to fall over the next decade.

Still waiting for you answer why it is technically impossible to have a grid powered by either 100% renewables or 100% carbon-free sources.


Cost.
 
Displayed 45 of 45 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

Come on, it's $10 a month, just do it.

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.