3 ms·
But hitting those big numbers is the whole point of scalability. It may be easier to build a few hundred giga factories than a few hundred nuclear plants. Wha
by 7952 5y ago
But hitting those big numbers is the whole point of scalability. It may be easier to build a few hundred giga factories than a few hundred nuclear plants. What you get is less useful, but politically and technically simpler. And work in other industries make storage more viable. Those HVDC links that America should build anyway make storage more viable. Reducing costs in renewables make storage more viable. Even reducing costs in nuclear power could make it more viable.
- Manuel_D 5y agoThe Tesla giga factory produces 35GWh of batteries per year. It would take ~14 years for a giga factory to produce just one hour's worth of storage. We need days at least, potentially weeks depending on the mix of renewables. Again, the scale just isn't there for batteries. This is why renewable evangelists assume something like hydrogen storage, or compressed air will deliver nearly-free storage. But that's just hope, who knows if these approaches will actually be competitive.
- sudosysgen 5y agoBy the time those 14 years are up we would also have had to throw out the batteries multiple times from degradation.
- 7952 5y agoAnd 35 factories lets you hit the 12hr mark within five years and deliver an 85% decarbonised grid. That may not be better but it could be more achievable.