3 ms·

Hydro only works if you have geography on your side. Flywheels don't have the capacity to do utility scale demand shifting. So, excluding hydro, am I right in

by nordify 11y ago

Hydro only works if you have geography on your side. Flywheels don't have the capacity to do utility scale demand shifting. So, excluding hydro, am I right in that the economics of energy storage do not work (yet)?

Retric 11y ago
You can shift electricity 1,000 miles each way before losses stack up. So, geography is not really an issue. ED: Currently, ~4,300 mi is about the limit on economical power transmission. But, that's a long trip.
- nordify 11y ago
  So, can we build enough hydro to make a difference and how much will it cost to beef up the grid to handle all the power going into and out of pumped hydro?
  - Retric 11y ago
    Depends on what you want to do, but overall not much. Standard lines hung on towers run from $1 million to $4 million a mile, depending on terrain and other factors. Though, we already have an electric grid and you can do a lot by simply shifting where each area's supply is coming from. AKA town A get's power from town B's power plant town B, get's power from town C's power plant etc. Also, a lot of this infrastructure is a ~20+ year problem. So, a 50 billion dollar bill spread over 20 years spread over the entire US is ~8.50$ per year per person.
    - nordify 11y ago
      I want to replace peaker plants with storage. Somehow I don't think the economics work out. Do you disagree? Even if we rebuild the whole continental US power grid (that's a lot more than $50 billion) to cope with the demands of using storage, it is unclear to me if we can build enough hydro to replace peaker plants. Apparently all other storage technologies other than hydro are cost-ineffective and/or do not have enough scale to solve the problem. Do you know if there is enough geography to go around for all the hydro we need or if there really are any cost-efficient alternatives?
      - Retric 11y ago
        You don't need to replace the grid, just add more capacity. The economics for ~100% up-time only work out when utility's are regulated to act that way. That means spare capacity and backups for your backups. As such I feel a few Peaker plants are actually a good idea. They should not be turned on every day and should be able to pick up the stack when unexpected things happen. In terms of hydro, we can build them to store ~12 hours worth of US electricity demand. Past that the geography still works just fine, but excess production becomes cheaper than excess storage. PS: Don't forget we already use pumped hydro. It's just a maximization problem where cost of excess capacity vs. extra storage.
beat 11y ago
Batteries are becoming cost-competitive as well. And as I said earlier, the economics don't need to work now in order to justify pilot programs and research, due to the long timelines involved in radically changing how the grid works. The assumption that the economics will work in the foreseeable future is enough.
- nordify 11y ago
  > Batteries are becoming cost-competitive as well. Can you quantify that? As far as I can tell the Powerwall is about as cost-competitive as battery storage gets and that's still far more expensive than just using grid power.

by nordify 11y ago

Retric 11y ago

You can shift electricity 1,000 miles each way before losses stack up. So, geography is not really an issue. ED: Currently, ~4,300 mi is about the limit on economical power transmission. But, that's a long trip.

nordify 11y ago
So, can we build enough hydro to make a difference and how much will it cost to beef up the grid to handle all the power going into and out of pumped hydro?
- Retric 11y ago
  Depends on what you want to do, but overall not much. Standard lines hung on towers run from $1 million to $4 million a mile, depending on terrain and other factors. Though, we already have an electric grid and you can do a lot by simply shifting where each area's supply is coming from. AKA town A get's power from town B's power plant town B, get's power from town C's power plant etc. Also, a lot of this infrastructure is a ~20+ year problem. So, a 50 billion dollar bill spread over 20 years spread over the entire US is ~8.50$ per year per person.
  - nordify 11y ago
    I want to replace peaker plants with storage. Somehow I don't think the economics work out. Do you disagree? Even if we rebuild the whole continental US power grid (that's a lot more than $50 billion) to cope with the demands of using storage, it is unclear to me if we can build enough hydro to replace peaker plants. Apparently all other storage technologies other than hydro are cost-ineffective and/or do not have enough scale to solve the problem. Do you know if there is enough geography to go around for all the hydro we need or if there really are any cost-efficient alternatives?
    - Retric 11y ago
      You don't need to replace the grid, just add more capacity. The economics for ~100% up-time only work out when utility's are regulated to act that way. That means spare capacity and backups for your backups. As such I feel a few Peaker plants are actually a good idea. They should not be turned on every day and should be able to pick up the stack when unexpected things happen. In terms of hydro, we can build them to store ~12 hours worth of US electricity demand. Past that the geography still works just fine, but excess production becomes cheaper than excess storage. PS: Don't forget we already use pumped hydro. It's just a maximization problem where cost of excess capacity vs. extra storage.

beat 11y ago

Batteries are becoming cost-competitive as well. And as I said earlier, the economics don't need to work now in order to justify pilot programs and research, due to the long timelines involved in radically changing how the grid works. The assumption that the economics will work in the foreseeable future is enough.

nordify 11y ago
> Batteries are becoming cost-competitive as well. Can you quantify that? As far as I can tell the Powerwall is about as cost-competitive as battery storage gets and that's still far more expensive than just using grid power.