4 ms·

>a 300 MW charging station Assume 90% efficiency - that means dropping 30 Megawatts of heat into the water in port. That could be a problem. Also - 300 Megawa

>a 300 MW charging station Assume 90% efficiency - that means dropping 30 Megawatts of heat into the water in port. That could be a problem. Also - 300 Megawatt single point loads? What's that going to do to grid stability?

_hypx 4y ago
It’s nuts. You can’t take the study seriously. Charging a few of these ships will easily overwhelm the local grid.
- Scoundreller 4y ago
  An idea would be to load a fully-charged container battery onto the ship when it’s otherwise loading up. You’d probably want it on a (top) corner for cooling and security anyway, but that could cause centre of gravity problems… Ports are usually well connected to infrastructure rights-of-way, so running a double or triple digit kV line to it isn’t out of line.
  - _hypx 4y ago
    The article is suggesting 300 MW of power draw per ship for around 24 hours. There is no extra time to recharge separately from the ship. So even if you did that, it makes no difference to the power grid. You will need truly enormous grid upgrades to make this feasible. It's sad that people on this website are falling for this. This is completely unrealistic. It will show up on one of those Youtube channels that mock scam energy proposals if it ever gets funding.
    - Scoundreller 4y ago
      The idea of the container batteries is that they don't have to be rapid-charged, but having batteries sitting around isn't productive either. I think the hard part is having 300MW (*#ships) of peaking capacity and the standby costs of when it's not being used. For reference, Toronto uses about 4500MW on a hot summer day (like today).
      - _hypx 4y ago
        Nothing is being rapid charged. You need 24 hours at 300 MW to charge one of these things. Either you use even more than 300 MW, or you have batteries charged many days in advance. Both are nutty ideas.
chrismartin 4y ago
A nuclear plant dumps a lot more than 30 MW of waste heat into its adjacent body of water. Is that a problem? Power grids can be upgraded, and a grid-connected battery that can send 300 MW in the other direction during occasional supply shortages is actually really good for grid stability. In that case the ship sells some power at lucrative rates (maybe $1k/mWh?), then recharges later at night after the demand peak. Bunkering (the process of loading fuel) already takes hours and often requires a rendezvous with a tanker ship at sea, so it's not like ships aren't already inconvenienced by their need to acquire energy.
- mikewarot 4y ago
  >A nuclear plant dumps a lot more than 30 MW of waste heat into its adjacent body of water. Is that a problem? Nuclear power plants near me generally have their own cooling ponds, covering vast amounts of ground, as they would otherwise emit too much waste heat into the ecosystem and kill all the wildlife. If there were multiple ships each dumping 30 MW of heat into a harbor, that could happen quickly. >Power grids can be upgraded, and a grid-connected battery that can send 300 MW in the other direction during occasional supply shortages is actually really good for grid stability. In that case the ship sells some power at lucrative rates (maybe $1k/mWh?), then recharges later at night after the demand peak. Ports are already at capacity, this would only make it worse.
Tade0 4y ago
Your average container ship produces as much waste heat when operating already.

_hypx 4y ago

It’s nuts. You can’t take the study seriously. Charging a few of these ships will easily overwhelm the local grid.

Scoundreller 4y ago
An idea would be to load a fully-charged container battery onto the ship when it’s otherwise loading up. You’d probably want it on a (top) corner for cooling and security anyway, but that could cause centre of gravity problems… Ports are usually well connected to infrastructure rights-of-way, so running a double or triple digit kV line to it isn’t out of line.
- _hypx 4y ago
  The article is suggesting 300 MW of power draw per ship for around 24 hours. There is no extra time to recharge separately from the ship. So even if you did that, it makes no difference to the power grid. You will need truly enormous grid upgrades to make this feasible. It's sad that people on this website are falling for this. This is completely unrealistic. It will show up on one of those Youtube channels that mock scam energy proposals if it ever gets funding.
  - Scoundreller 4y ago
    The idea of the container batteries is that they don't have to be rapid-charged, but having batteries sitting around isn't productive either. I think the hard part is having 300MW (*#ships) of peaking capacity and the standby costs of when it's not being used. For reference, Toronto uses about 4500MW on a hot summer day (like today).
    - _hypx 4y ago
      Nothing is being rapid charged. You need 24 hours at 300 MW to charge one of these things. Either you use even more than 300 MW, or you have batteries charged many days in advance. Both are nutty ideas.

chrismartin 4y ago

A nuclear plant dumps a lot more than 30 MW of waste heat into its adjacent body of water. Is that a problem? Power grids can be upgraded, and a grid-connected battery that can send 300 MW in the other direction during occasional supply shortages is actually really good for grid stability. In that case the ship sells some power at lucrative rates (maybe $1k/mWh?), then recharges later at night after the demand peak. Bunkering (the process of loading fuel) already takes hours and often requires a rendezvous with a tanker ship at sea, so it's not like ships aren't already inconvenienced by their need to acquire energy.

mikewarot 4y ago
>A nuclear plant dumps a lot more than 30 MW of waste heat into its adjacent body of water. Is that a problem? Nuclear power plants near me generally have their own cooling ponds, covering vast amounts of ground, as they would otherwise emit too much waste heat into the ecosystem and kill all the wildlife. If there were multiple ships each dumping 30 MW of heat into a harbor, that could happen quickly. >Power grids can be upgraded, and a grid-connected battery that can send 300 MW in the other direction during occasional supply shortages is actually really good for grid stability. In that case the ship sells some power at lucrative rates (maybe $1k/mWh?), then recharges later at night after the demand peak. Ports are already at capacity, this would only make it worse.

Tade0 4y ago

Your average container ship produces as much waste heat when operating already.