Giant Batteries Are Transforming the Way the U.S. Uses Electricity

[reACTIONary]

Giant Batteries Are Transforming the Way the U.S. Uses Electricity

They’re delivering solar power after dark in California and helping to stabilize grids in other states. And the technology is expanding rapidly.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/05/07/climate/battery-electricity-solar-california-texas.html?unlocked_article_code=1.rE0.2ov2.YrHBTPnL5QAm&smid=url-share

[hunter]

1. These batteries are increasing the cost of electricity and entrenching our dependence on natural gas...

... for decades to come.

In the long run they'll do nothing, absolutely nothing, to reduce the total amount of greenhouse gasses humans dump into earth's atmosphere and oceans.

The number of batteries it would take to displace fossil fuels entirely is ludicrous.

Anyone can observe the operation of gigawatt scale solar, wind, and energy storage systems here:

https://www.caiso.com/TodaysOutlook/Pages/supply.html

and here:

https://app.electricitymaps.com/zone/US-CAL-CISO

Using this real world data you can model any kind of energy utopia you like by subtracting out the energy resources you don't like.

"Renewable energy" only models that exclude nuclear power are extremely disappointing. It becomes clear that wind and solar power are entirely dependent on fossil fuels and "creative" accounting schemes for their economic viability.

The most important thing to ask when imagining any energy utopia is: "Can it support eight billion people?"

If it can't then it's just another case of "I've got mine, you can go die" economics.

[The Bopper]

2. Imagine

If you told me 30 years ago I would be carrying a phone, in which I cannot only talk but see the internet, I would have said IMPOSSIBLE. Saying we can’t do something because, right now, it’s hard, doesn’t mean it can’t be done.

[Igel]

3. So we should have passed regulations to dispose of landlines.

Phase them out by 1995. Because in 1980 we believed that something better would come along.

I was in a church long ago. It was a splinter of a large church that had taught that Jesus would return in '72. They believed. And they made what they realized were foolish choices based on their beliefs. Their choices hurt them--and their kids.

Let's not make the same mistake. We hope for better but our beliefs should be rooted in fairly solid science, not, "I believe."

"It's hard, doesn't mean it can't be done" doesn't entail "we believe, therefore it'll be done--and in the time frame we believe."

Not my belief system.

[hunter]

4. Some things truly are impossible, and many things highly unlikely...

... by the known laws of physics.

It's safe to say Star Trek style transporters, warp drives, time travel, artificial gravity, and inertial dampers are impossible in this universe.

For reasons we don't fully understand yet, fusion may never be a practical power source. The fusion reactors we've built so far are not even close to being practical power sources, even though far more money has been spent pursuing fusion than was spent for the entire Manhattan project. More brain power has been applied to the problem as well.

We went from the Chicago Pile 1 nuclear reactor, which first achieved criticality in December 1942, to the first nuclear power plant to supply electricity to the grid within fifteen years.

The first fusion reaction was achieved in 1958. One of my dad's friends was building components for experimental fusion reactors fifty years ago and I remember visiting the big vacuum chamber these were tested in, peering through a leaded glass portal to see an eerie purple glow.

California has gigawatt scale solar projects, wind projects, battery projects, and hydroelectric storage projects, but we are nowhere close to quitting fossil fuels, nor is there any foreseeable path by which this might happen.

Our world is burning. The natural environment as we knew it is collapsing. Some of us are in denial or grieving.

Pretending that our fossil fuel use isn't the cause of global warming is one form of denial. Pretending that magical renewable energy technologies will save us is another.

[reACTIONary]

8. Nuclear Power, and maybe someday...

.... fusion, are definitely needed.

Batteries can certainly be helpful with nuclear power for purposes of load leveling. You can't switch a nuclear power plant on and off.

[hunter]

9. Why would you switch a nuclear power plant on and off?

A near 100% reliable electric grid is a very desirable goal.

Batteries are not the best way to accomplish load leveling.

One of the unspoken arguments against nuclear power is that it makes large scale solar and wind developments redundant.

If we build more nuclear power plants we can shut down and dismantle fossil fuel power plants. If we continue to build nuclear power plants we can shut down large scale solar and wind developments too.

[reACTIONary]

10. You wouldn't, and you can't....

.... during low demand, a lot of generated power goes to waste. Load leveling stores power during low demand and allows it to be used during peak demand. There are several ways of doing this - batteries are (one more) way of doing it.

[MineralMan]

5. Taking the world by storm, eh?

I hate those video ads!

[hunter]

6. I've removed video advertising from my personal universe.

I don't see it on my television, I don't see it on my computers.

Am I missing something?

[Torchlight]

7. Coworker tells me fossils fuell is the only truly viable method.

He says getting energy from non-fossil fuel sources will increase our dependecy on fossil fuels. He also says we should be concerned about windmill cancer clusters. Pretty sure after listening to him once, his degree is from Youtube University and some night courses at reddit high school.