4 ms·
When talking about pumped hydro the roundtrip efficiency usually is around 70-80%. Not even close to batteries but way more scalable. Chemical storage is horri
by Gwypaas 4y ago
When talking about pumped hydro the roundtrip efficiency usually is around 70-80%. Not even close to batteries but way more scalable.
Chemical storage is horrific. Creating diesel and burning it in a turbine or similar you start at 40-50% for the burning phase, without even converting anything in the first place.
If you go the fuel cell route you tend to end up somewhere at 40-60% efficiency.
So no, the only use case for chemical storage is either where you want energy density. Say aviation or maritime shipping. Or nation state like energy security, where you can pay the efficiency price.
For all other use cases any optimization done, or better usage of the energy, will eat into that horrific round trip efficiency.
- Dma54rhs 4y agoHow is it as scalable when you're at the mercy of the local geology? There are not that many places where pumped storage is viable, its not just pumping water up to some random hill.
- Gwypaas 4y agoThe question rather is, how much pumped storage do you even need when you do geographical decoupling through HVDC interconnections? Similarly, how bound are you to the local topology? The longest already existing HVDC line in China is 3,293 km (2,046 miles). That brings you from the Rockies to any location within continental US. Utilize renewables to have bidirectional flow compared to traditional hydro.
- ncmncm 4y agoExcept, it really is just pumping water up a hill. Siting for pumped storage is overwhelmingly easier than for hydro generation. The latter needs a watershed. A dike around a hilltop does not.