5 ms·

I have followed this strain of industry for many years and have been actively looking for something to invest in. Storage is not even close to being at a usefu

I have followed this strain of industry for many years and have been actively looking for something to invest in. Storage is not even close to being at a useful stage for anything other than pilot projects which is why that is what we have and not any really large scale storage facilities and won't have it anytime soon. It's not a matter of economics but physics and we just don't have any fundamental scientific discoveries that warrant the hype we see.

Tade0 6y ago
Off the top of my head, here's a venture that's a result of a project going past the pilot phase: https://holtecinternational.com/company/divisions/hi-power/ https://holtecinternational.com/company/divisions/hi-power/ The physics is there. As for economics - there's a lot of low-hanging fruit to be picked in the peak-shaving market, where prices are very different from baseload, as Musk's famous 100-day from commissioning to completion battery showed.
pjc50 6y ago
It's more a matter of chemical engineering. The dollars-per-ionization maths can be made to work. The problems are more in bulk chemical handling and manufacturing processes and the materials science of electrodes. (Oddly this is the same state as the thorium reactors, which make sense on paper but are annoyingly hard to build)
epistasis 6y ago
> It's not a matter of economics but physics What physics principle can you cite here? There are no physical limits that have stoped the current grid scale deployments. It's all economics: how cheaply can you get materials to your factory and how cheaply can you roll your batteries. (And just a warning, this sort of invocation if physics when it doesn't apply is a way to scare off technical people from wanting to let you invest in them.) There are real, grid scale installations in California, Australia, and other places in very recent years. Another GWh will be deployed to Moss Landing, CA soon. The real problem is convincing utility execs to try something new. Based on how they are regulated, saving money doesn't necessarily mean that they can increase their profits. And in fact rate-basing means that they often want to spend a ton of money on unnecessary projects.
- ThomPete 6y ago
  It's always a feedback loop. You can get it cheaper because we have better technologies that make it possible and we have better technologies available because we can make it cheaper. There are real attempts at all sorts of things. That doesn't mean they are feasible at- scale. And we are talking energy here not just electricity. Thanks for the warning but you couldn't be further from the reality with regards to that part.
  - epistasis 6y ago
    True about the feedback loops! However I think we often underestimate what can be done simply by scaling up an economy. Nobody (as in no published estimates) anticipated the precipitous drop in battery costs, or solar PV costs. And even more people were skeptical of the dramatic costs on wind turbines. Many (most?) utility executives and planners aren't aware of these cost drops, based on their planned deployments and their IRP processes. They often use old cost estimates rather than projections of costs into the future, even! I wish you tons of luck on your ventures, we really need more people like you out there!
    - ThomPete 6y ago
      I wish it was that simple. Solar and wind are less than 1% of world energy consumption and not expected to grow substantially. It's nothing what so ever and there is a reason why a lot of funding for renewables died out in the beginning of this century and only countries with a political agenda is left. China reduced their investments into alternatives last year too. With regards to storage until we have proper fuel-cells that are mobile and easy to fill up we aren't closer to anything useful than we are to fusion or Thorium, in fact Thorium and fusion might be more likely to happen.
      - Tade0 6y ago
        Solar and wind are less than 1% of world energy consumption and not expected to grow substantially. Citation needed, as I was unable to find a source that backed up any of these claims. in fact Thorium and fusion might be more likely to happen. What signs point to that?
wongarsu 6y ago
Pumped hydrostorage is the obvious exception: it's cheap and widely deployed, and has been around forever. It's major problem is that the cheap price depends on favorable geography.

Tade0 6y ago

Off the top of my head, here's a venture that's a result of a project going past the pilot phase: https://holtecinternational.com/company/divisions/hi-power/ https://holtecinternational.com/company/divisions/hi-power/ The physics is there. As for economics - there's a lot of low-hanging fruit to be picked in the peak-shaving market, where prices are very different from baseload, as Musk's famous 100-day from commissioning to completion battery showed.

pjc50 6y ago

It's more a matter of chemical engineering. The dollars-per-ionization maths can be made to work. The problems are more in bulk chemical handling and manufacturing processes and the materials science of electrodes. (Oddly this is the same state as the thorium reactors, which make sense on paper but are annoyingly hard to build)

epistasis 6y ago

> It's not a matter of economics but physics What physics principle can you cite here? There are no physical limits that have stoped the current grid scale deployments. It's all economics: how cheaply can you get materials to your factory and how cheaply can you roll your batteries. (And just a warning, this sort of invocation if physics when it doesn't apply is a way to scare off technical people from wanting to let you invest in them.) There are real, grid scale installations in California, Australia, and other places in very recent years. Another GWh will be deployed to Moss Landing, CA soon. The real problem is convincing utility execs to try something new. Based on how they are regulated, saving money doesn't necessarily mean that they can increase their profits. And in fact rate-basing means that they often want to spend a ton of money on unnecessary projects.

ThomPete 6y ago
It's always a feedback loop. You can get it cheaper because we have better technologies that make it possible and we have better technologies available because we can make it cheaper. There are real attempts at all sorts of things. That doesn't mean they are feasible at- scale. And we are talking energy here not just electricity. Thanks for the warning but you couldn't be further from the reality with regards to that part.
- epistasis 6y ago
  True about the feedback loops! However I think we often underestimate what can be done simply by scaling up an economy. Nobody (as in no published estimates) anticipated the precipitous drop in battery costs, or solar PV costs. And even more people were skeptical of the dramatic costs on wind turbines. Many (most?) utility executives and planners aren't aware of these cost drops, based on their planned deployments and their IRP processes. They often use old cost estimates rather than projections of costs into the future, even! I wish you tons of luck on your ventures, we really need more people like you out there!
  - ThomPete 6y ago
    I wish it was that simple. Solar and wind are less than 1% of world energy consumption and not expected to grow substantially. It's nothing what so ever and there is a reason why a lot of funding for renewables died out in the beginning of this century and only countries with a political agenda is left. China reduced their investments into alternatives last year too. With regards to storage until we have proper fuel-cells that are mobile and easy to fill up we aren't closer to anything useful than we are to fusion or Thorium, in fact Thorium and fusion might be more likely to happen.
    - Tade0 6y ago
      Solar and wind are less than 1% of world energy consumption and not expected to grow substantially. Citation needed, as I was unable to find a source that backed up any of these claims. in fact Thorium and fusion might be more likely to happen. What signs point to that?

wongarsu 6y ago

Pumped hydrostorage is the obvious exception: it's cheap and widely deployed, and has been around forever. It's major problem is that the cheap price depends on favorable geography.