• @IvanOverdrive@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    60
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    My favorite solution for storage of excess power is closed loop pumped hydro. Two bodies of water of different elevations are connected by a generator/pump. When there is too much power, the pump moves the water to the higher lake. When the power is needed, the water flows through the generator to the lower lake.

      • @IvanOverdrive@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I was talking with an engineer about using a closed loop hydro system at home, maybe in a tower. He said the water wouldn’t have enough head to generate electricity. But that compressed air energy storage just might be the solution I was looking for.

      • @Dashmezzo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        -1
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Hydrogen fuel cells also. Use the excess to make hydrogen which is simple to store and then use it as a fuel to burn when you have demand. These have started to be put at the bottom of wind turbines so they don’t need to be stopped when the wind is blowing but there is no grid demand.

        All these systems help balance the grid too meaning these renewables can be used as base loads instead of dirtier base load generators like coal or gas fire stations.

        • Boomer Humor Doomergod
          link
          fedilink
          English
          141 year ago

          hydrogen which is simple to store

          Hydrogen is famously not simple to store. This is part of the reason that SpaceX rockets use kerosene instead of hydrogen despite the better performance.

          • Be careful that other rockets run on liquid hydrogen, which should be kept extremely cold. That is the main problem for them. That being said, hydrogen is indeed not easy to store and transport.

            • Boomer Humor Doomergod
              link
              fedilink
              English
              21 year ago

              True. Liquid hydrogen takes something that’s already difficult to work with and adds even more complexity to the system.

      • @IvanOverdrive@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        That’s my second favorite solution. One of the cons of the mines is they tend to be too remote from urban areas. But if that’s not a factor then you’re golden.

        • @SupraMario@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          Lol that’s great, and I was more talking about the ones for mines that already have deep holes, this one is hilariously stupid though. Water does make a lot more sense though, only issue I can see with it would be evaporation.

          • @Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            It’s easy to use closed tanks. Mines are still a good site for energy storage, but using water instead of weighted sleds still makes more sense. Simpler over all system.

          • @freebee@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            -11 year ago

            depends a bit on how much energy it costs to build it all, how many decades it should be used how often, and if it’s then durable enough to actually earn back the extra energy it costs. It might, just sayin’

            • @Dashmezzo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              31 year ago

              We use gravity batteries in the UK. They work well and are pretty good at their efficiency. When you are creating massive systems they are made to last decades. There is always upkeep but it is the same with coal, gas and nuclear plants. All these renewables are far cheaper and far more cost effective than these power stations and for years the main problem has been that wind and solar cannot be used as base load, but with battery storage on a mass scale, thermal and hydrogen storage, we are now at a place where building out far more solar and wind than we need is viable and mixing in these technologies to provide base load and grid stability.