5 ms·

> a GW of solar + storage is much cheaper than a GW of nuke. Storage is far from a solved problem. There are many solutions for storage but we have yet to see

> a GW of solar + storage is much cheaper than a GW of nuke. Storage is far from a solved problem. There are many solutions for storage but we have yet to see one truly work at scale.

ncmncm 5y ago
False. Pumped hydro is already working at scale, and being built out as fast as capital can be scared up for it. Pumped hydro can be used in what may be a surprisingly larger range of places than usually imagined. First, it does not need an existing dam in an existing watershed. It doesn't need any watershed, just a hill, ideally with a depression. A circular dam can even be built on top of a hill, and that is being done, although it is better if you don't need to build all the sides. Pumped hydro can be used where there is no hill, if a deep cavity exists underground. Then, you pump water up and out of the cavity to charge it, and let it back in when you need power. Deep cavities exist all over the world. You can combine a hill reservoir and a deep-cavity reservoir to get enormously more energy storage. Pumped hydro has been demonstrated using a spherical tank deep under the ocean. There, you have a pump/turbine at the bottom of the tank, and you pump the water out to charge it. Amazingly, you don't need a pipe down to the tank, because water vapor fills vacated space in the tank. You just need a wire. The tank doesn't need to be very big if it is placed deep enough; the deeper it is, the more "head" you have. Liquifying air is extremely mature tech. So, storing liquified air is something already done at scale, for decades, and can absorb peak renewable power. Power is released by letting the gas vaporize through a turbine, warmed by ambient air, or even by heat pumped out in the first place, if banked. A 100 MW liquified-air storage facility is under construction in Chile. Synthetic ammonia is mature tech. A GW-scale ammonia electric-synthesizer plant is under construction in Norway. Anhydrous ammonia can be burned in a gas turbine. Synthetic hydrogen is mature tech, and being built out in volume. Efficiency will only ever increase, as better catalysts are discovered and put in service. You can store hydrogen in the same underground reservoirs where natural gas is stored today. Iron-air batteries are mature enough tech that mega-factories to produce iron-air batteries are already under construction, to deliver in volume in 2023.
- moooo99 5y ago
  > False. Pumped hydro is already working at scale, and being built out as fast as capital can be scared up for it. But not all countries have a suitable topology to build pumped hydro at a meaningful scale. And building everything from scratch isn't really feasible.
- EricE 5y ago
  Where are you going to get these deep cavities? Where do you do pumped hyrdo in Las Vegas or Phoenix? Lots of solar, no economical way to store the excess right now. You list lots of technologies that are "mature" - but maturity isn't enough. They have to be economically viable, and until they are they will continue to exist mainly in posts like yours. In the meantime it's nuts we keep ignoring nuclear and continue to frame discussions around nuclear in the context of light water reactors, which are the worst kind of nuclear tech we have. There are other reactor designs that are far more practical, fail safe (do not require active cooling, coast naturally to a stop if interrupted, can actually burn what many erroneously refer to as nuclear waste, etc.) We should be doing ALL of the above, not just arguing about nuclear vs. some other tech. We need it ALL. China is charging forward with liquid thorium/molten salt reactors. If they establish the tech before we do - watch out. The industrial revolution forward saw the greatest expansion of wealth and democratization of power for humanity - and the bulk of that was unlocked by cheap energy! Energy is the greatest force multiplier and we are FAR to casual about just how important it is. Americans are starting to figure that out with the policy changes brought in by the recent administration - energy pricing affects all aspects of modern society and in pretty dramatic ways. Europe is going to find out if they keep poking the Russian bear too. Especially Germany after they turned off all their nuclear plants. Increase reliance on fossil fuels and then antagonize our greatest provider of them - bloody brilliant!
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    We can spend money on nukes, or spend the same money building out renewables and storage. The latter produces a great deal more power per dollar, and starts delivering immediately. Nukes cost a great deal more, and often produce exactly 0 kWh, ever; but in any case not for many years, and many billions over budget.
fsflover 5y ago
https://whatisnuclear.com/waste.html https://whatisnuclear.com/waste.html
- nicolaslem 5y ago
  You probably misread my comment which was about energy storage.

> a GW of solar + storage is much cheaper than a GW of nuke. Storage is far from a solved problem. There are many solutions for storage but we have yet to see one truly work at scale.

ncmncm 5y ago

False. Pumped hydro is already working at scale, and being built out as fast as capital can be scared up for it. Pumped hydro can be used in what may be a surprisingly larger range of places than usually imagined. First, it does not need an existing dam in an existing watershed. It doesn't need any watershed, just a hill, ideally with a depression. A circular dam can even be built on top of a hill, and that is being done, although it is better if you don't need to build all the sides. Pumped hydro can be used where there is no hill, if a deep cavity exists underground. Then, you pump water up and out of the cavity to charge it, and let it back in when you need power. Deep cavities exist all over the world. You can combine a hill reservoir and a deep-cavity reservoir to get enormously more energy storage. Pumped hydro has been demonstrated using a spherical tank deep under the ocean. There, you have a pump/turbine at the bottom of the tank, and you pump the water out to charge it. Amazingly, you don't need a pipe down to the tank, because water vapor fills vacated space in the tank. You just need a wire. The tank doesn't need to be very big if it is placed deep enough; the deeper it is, the more "head" you have. Liquifying air is extremely mature tech. So, storing liquified air is something already done at scale, for decades, and can absorb peak renewable power. Power is released by letting the gas vaporize through a turbine, warmed by ambient air, or even by heat pumped out in the first place, if banked. A 100 MW liquified-air storage facility is under construction in Chile. Synthetic ammonia is mature tech. A GW-scale ammonia electric-synthesizer plant is under construction in Norway. Anhydrous ammonia can be burned in a gas turbine. Synthetic hydrogen is mature tech, and being built out in volume. Efficiency will only ever increase, as better catalysts are discovered and put in service. You can store hydrogen in the same underground reservoirs where natural gas is stored today. Iron-air batteries are mature enough tech that mega-factories to produce iron-air batteries are already under construction, to deliver in volume in 2023.

moooo99 5y ago
> False. Pumped hydro is already working at scale, and being built out as fast as capital can be scared up for it. But not all countries have a suitable topology to build pumped hydro at a meaningful scale. And building everything from scratch isn't really feasible.
EricE 5y ago
Where are you going to get these deep cavities? Where do you do pumped hyrdo in Las Vegas or Phoenix? Lots of solar, no economical way to store the excess right now. You list lots of technologies that are "mature" - but maturity isn't enough. They have to be economically viable, and until they are they will continue to exist mainly in posts like yours. In the meantime it's nuts we keep ignoring nuclear and continue to frame discussions around nuclear in the context of light water reactors, which are the worst kind of nuclear tech we have. There are other reactor designs that are far more practical, fail safe (do not require active cooling, coast naturally to a stop if interrupted, can actually burn what many erroneously refer to as nuclear waste, etc.) We should be doing ALL of the above, not just arguing about nuclear vs. some other tech. We need it ALL. China is charging forward with liquid thorium/molten salt reactors. If they establish the tech before we do - watch out. The industrial revolution forward saw the greatest expansion of wealth and democratization of power for humanity - and the bulk of that was unlocked by cheap energy! Energy is the greatest force multiplier and we are FAR to casual about just how important it is. Americans are starting to figure that out with the policy changes brought in by the recent administration - energy pricing affects all aspects of modern society and in pretty dramatic ways. Europe is going to find out if they keep poking the Russian bear too. Especially Germany after they turned off all their nuclear plants. Increase reliance on fossil fuels and then antagonize our greatest provider of them - bloody brilliant!
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- ncmncm 5y ago
  We can spend money on nukes, or spend the same money building out renewables and storage. The latter produces a great deal more power per dollar, and starts delivering immediately. Nukes cost a great deal more, and often produce exactly 0 kWh, ever; but in any case not for many years, and many billions over budget.

fsflover 5y ago

https://whatisnuclear.com/waste.html https://whatisnuclear.com/waste.html

nicolaslem 5y ago
You probably misread my comment which was about energy storage.