3 ms·
I doubt copper would be used in that kind of thing. It's worse, but not that much worse. Energy storage might not be an issue in a decade or so. There's no la
by eternityforest 4y ago
I doubt copper would be used in that kind of thing. It's worse, but not that much worse.
Energy storage might not be an issue in a decade or so. There's no law of physics saying they can't make batteries without conflict metals. Eventually someone's going to invent a battery made of some cheap hydrocarbon you make by the tanker car, or that compressed Co2 turbine system will turn out to be the real deal, or they'll figure out magnesium air, etc.
- ncmncm 4y agoA clear majority of utility storage will not be batteries, just because cheaper methods will be favored. The cheapest will rely on E = Fx, where F is air pressure, or gravity, or buoyancy. But liquified anhydrous ammonia, despite being more costly to make, will be extremely popular because it is easy to transport and store, and is fantastically useful for many purposes.
- eternityforest 4y agoI think that depends on battery tech. If they get magnesium air or metal free organic flow working I would imagine it would probably be chosen over mechanical methods. Ideally I suspect you don't really want utility storage anyway, you want something so cheap, small, and renewable you can do point of load storage and have a bit of grid independence, and not need as much transmission infrastructure.
- ncmncm 4y agoPoint of use storage costs a lot more.
- pfdietz 4y agoCopper is used in applications where the conductor is volume constrained. Transmission lines are not volume constrained, they are mass constrained. Aluminum is superior there: its electrical conductivity divided by density is higher than copper.