3 ms·

That's electricity only, though, right? The last time I looked at numbers that was a third of actually energy consumption, the rest going for heat and transport

That's electricity only, though, right? The last time I looked at numbers that was a third of actually energy consumption, the rest going for heat and transport. (That was for the UK.) Not that I'm saying liquid-salt batteries is are a bad thing; if they work, they'll fill a much-needing-filling hole in our energy infrastructure. But they only solve a small part of the problem.

tedsanders 11y ago
Right, hot thermal storage is used to store electricity. And yes, hot thermal storage does not solve the world's energy problems by itself. To your point about electricity being 1/3 of energy consumption, I still think it's important to celebrate and invest in technologies that store electricity. Even though electricity is just one part of the energy picture, electricity is far more expensive to store than other kinds of energy such as liquid fuel (which can be stored in barrels and tanks), natural gas (which can be stored in the ground or in tanks), or solid energy sources like coal or nuclear (which can just sit in a box).
yk 11y ago
But electricity is in some sense the highest quality energy. You can easily replace heating with a resistor and combustion engines with electrical motors, where the reverse is usually much harder.
- dredmorbius 11y ago
  Better to swap heat exchanges or induction heating for resistors. But electrical applications require access to ample amounts of demand-following supply. An inherent challenge with existing models.
dredmorbius 11y ago
Yes, this is addressing electricity, which is ~30-40% of total present energy consumption. But: 1. Electricity substitutes for other energy uses. Electrically-supplied heat (heat exchange, direct resistance heating, induction heating), some motive power (personal EVs from bicycles to automobiles, catenary-supplied rail, possibly commutator-supplied intracity cargo freight). Cooking. 2. Much of present energy use combines storage + on-demand use. Coal, oil, and gas are _largely_ simply energy carriers (a non-negligible component is actually _chemical_ inputs -- 14% of coal, about 8% of oil, I'm unsure of the number for gas). If you can swap elecricity for those inputs (local on-demand power or heat), you're ahead of the game. Some options have poor substitutability at best, particularly marine and air transport, small handheld machinery away from mains power, and remote sites with generating needs. Take a look at small Alaskan towns above the Arctic Circle. The central feature of most is their fuel depot. 3. Generally, as fuels become more expensive (extraction costs, taxes, synthesis expenses), electricity will substitute for more of their uses. Note that molten salt isn't a battery in the standard redox sense, but simply raw thermal storage capacity. Yes, there's the standard 60% Carnot loss, though actually that's _far_ better than the 65-85% PV losses for conventional single-layer PV technology (theoretical maximum efficiency about 40%, higher efficiencies are possible with multi-layer, and more expensive, technologies).

tedsanders 11y ago

Right, hot thermal storage is used to store electricity. And yes, hot thermal storage does not solve the world's energy problems by itself. To your point about electricity being 1/3 of energy consumption, I still think it's important to celebrate and invest in technologies that store electricity. Even though electricity is just one part of the energy picture, electricity is far more expensive to store than other kinds of energy such as liquid fuel (which can be stored in barrels and tanks), natural gas (which can be stored in the ground or in tanks), or solid energy sources like coal or nuclear (which can just sit in a box).

yk 11y ago

But electricity is in some sense the highest quality energy. You can easily replace heating with a resistor and combustion engines with electrical motors, where the reverse is usually much harder.

dredmorbius 11y ago
Better to swap heat exchanges or induction heating for resistors. But electrical applications require access to ample amounts of demand-following supply. An inherent challenge with existing models.

dredmorbius 11y ago

Yes, this is addressing electricity, which is ~30-40% of total present energy consumption. But: 1. Electricity substitutes for other energy uses. Electrically-supplied heat (heat exchange, direct resistance heating, induction heating), some motive power (personal EVs from bicycles to automobiles, catenary-supplied rail, possibly commutator-supplied intracity cargo freight). Cooking. 2. Much of present energy use combines storage + on-demand use. Coal, oil, and gas are _largely_ simply energy carriers (a non-negligible component is actually _chemical_ inputs -- 14% of coal, about 8% of oil, I'm unsure of the number for gas). If you can swap elecricity for those inputs (local on-demand power or heat), you're ahead of the game. Some options have poor substitutability at best, particularly marine and air transport, small handheld machinery away from mains power, and remote sites with generating needs. Take a look at small Alaskan towns above the Arctic Circle. The central feature of most is their fuel depot. 3. Generally, as fuels become more expensive (extraction costs, taxes, synthesis expenses), electricity will substitute for more of their uses. Note that molten salt isn't a battery in the standard redox sense, but simply raw thermal storage capacity. Yes, there's the standard 60% Carnot loss, though actually that's _far_ better than the 65-85% PV losses for conventional single-layer PV technology (theoretical maximum efficiency about 40%, higher efficiencies are possible with multi-layer, and more expensive, technologies).