5 ms·

Assembled in Germany Metall forged in china Real problem with energywende is that you have a point to point infrastructure (powerplant to city) and have to con

Assembled in Germany Metall forged in china Real problem with energywende is that you have a point to point infrastructure (powerplant to city) and have to convert it to a n-to n infrastructure. Every consumer can now be producer. This results in partially absurd rewards for powering off your mini-plant to stabilize the network. Also the lack of storage, at the moment. Currently some companys consider, forging giant conrete containers, sink them out in the ocean, and pump them dry when there is a energy surplus. When there is higher demand, the undersea storage seas, can be flooded and energy released on a controlled basis.

adrianN 11y ago
Also the lack of storage, at the moment. Currently some companys consider, forging giant conrete containers, sink them out in the ocean, and pump them dry when there is a energy surplus. When there is higher demand, the undersea storage seas, can be flooded and energy released on a controlled basis. That actually sounds like a really clever solution to the energy storage problem.
- mattlutze 11y ago
  It's a neat extension to the concept of using water towers or higher-altitude reservoirs for similar effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricit...
morsch 11y ago
This results in partially absurd rewards for powering off your mini-plant to stabilize the network. Being paid not to output electricity or, similarly, being paid to consume electricity -- which is also a thing -- is absurd only at first glance. But really, it's just transparent pricing. And it incentivizes people to come up with ways to exploit it, either by storing power when it's cheap and releasing it when it's expensive, or by only consuming it when it's cheap. I think it's pretty neat. It's not a new thing, either: power has always been cheaper at off-peak (during the night), because big power plants such as nuclear plants can't (or couldn't, or wouldn't) scale up and down based on time of day. This was exploited by making things such as a night storage heater, which truly is absurd, because it's both impractical (slow to react to human capriciousness) and inefficient (energy losses during initial electricity generation and power transfer).
rwj 11y ago
Selling back your power by slowing or stopping production is an old technique. Large factories that buy power on long-term fixed-price contracts will often sell that power back to the electric company when rates are high. It might be more common now, but "powering off ... to stabilize the network" existed long before the push for renewables.
rbehrends 11y ago
> Currently some companys consider, forging giant conrete containers, sink them out in the ocean, and pump them dry when there is a energy surplus. Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) is nothing new per se. CAES plants have been operational in Huntorf, Germany, since the late 1970s and in McIntosh, Alabama, since the late 1990s. The problem with current technology CAES is that it is not energy-efficient (around 30% for the existing installations, though there's room for improvement) and not carbon-neutral. The underlying problem is that compressing air generates heat, which is then dissipated; however, that means that during decompression, the air has to be reheated, usually with natural gas. There are currently projects underway with both Adiabatic [1] and Isothermal [2] CAES to improve efficiency and make the process carbon-neutral. Google "SustainX" and "ADELE RWE" for examples of current projects. [1] http://energystorage.org/advanced-adiabatic-compressed-air-energy-storage-aa-caes http://energystorage.org/advanced-adiabatic-compressed-air-e... [2] http://energystorage.org/energy-storage/technologies/isothermal-caes http://energystorage.org/energy-storage/technologies/isother...

adrianN 11y ago

Also the lack of storage, at the moment. Currently some companys consider, forging giant conrete containers, sink them out in the ocean, and pump them dry when there is a energy surplus. When there is higher demand, the undersea storage seas, can be flooded and energy released on a controlled basis. That actually sounds like a really clever solution to the energy storage problem.

mattlutze 11y ago
It's a neat extension to the concept of using water towers or higher-altitude reservoirs for similar effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricit...

morsch 11y ago

This results in partially absurd rewards for powering off your mini-plant to stabilize the network. Being paid not to output electricity or, similarly, being paid to consume electricity -- which is also a thing -- is absurd only at first glance. But really, it's just transparent pricing. And it incentivizes people to come up with ways to exploit it, either by storing power when it's cheap and releasing it when it's expensive, or by only consuming it when it's cheap. I think it's pretty neat. It's not a new thing, either: power has always been cheaper at off-peak (during the night), because big power plants such as nuclear plants can't (or couldn't, or wouldn't) scale up and down based on time of day. This was exploited by making things such as a night storage heater, which truly is absurd, because it's both impractical (slow to react to human capriciousness) and inefficient (energy losses during initial electricity generation and power transfer).

rwj 11y ago

Selling back your power by slowing or stopping production is an old technique. Large factories that buy power on long-term fixed-price contracts will often sell that power back to the electric company when rates are high. It might be more common now, but "powering off ... to stabilize the network" existed long before the push for renewables.

rbehrends 11y ago

> Currently some companys consider, forging giant conrete containers, sink them out in the ocean, and pump them dry when there is a energy surplus. Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) is nothing new per se. CAES plants have been operational in Huntorf, Germany, since the late 1970s and in McIntosh, Alabama, since the late 1990s. The problem with current technology CAES is that it is not energy-efficient (around 30% for the existing installations, though there's room for improvement) and not carbon-neutral. The underlying problem is that compressing air generates heat, which is then dissipated; however, that means that during decompression, the air has to be reheated, usually with natural gas. There are currently projects underway with both Adiabatic [1] and Isothermal [2] CAES to improve efficiency and make the process carbon-neutral. Google "SustainX" and "ADELE RWE" for examples of current projects. [1] http://energystorage.org/advanced-adiabatic-compressed-air-energy-storage-aa-caes http://energystorage.org/advanced-adiabatic-compressed-air-e... [2] http://energystorage.org/energy-storage/technologies/isothermal-caes http://energystorage.org/energy-storage/technologies/isother...