3 ms·

This amounts to a long winded way of hand-waving away the shortcomings of battery storage without actually proposing a plan to resolve them. We do have lithium

This amounts to a long winded way of hand-waving away the shortcomings of battery storage without actually proposing a plan to resolve them. We do have lithium ion and lithium iron phosphate batteries, but not in sufficient quantities. Your proposal amounts to crossing our fingers and hoping that extraction industries can accommodate a 100x increase in output over the next decade, without significant increase in price. There are indeed alternative battery chemistries but they aren't being used because various shortcomings make lithium based batteries the most effective. Nobody has ever commercially deployed hydrogen storage, and most hydrogen is produced via steam reformation. The fact that you performed electrolysis as a child does not somehow mitigate the difficulties of using it as a form of grid storage. If you do have a plan to make it viable, go talk to VCs and you'll be a billionaire. But alas, actually delivering grid storage is harder than making promises.

ben_w 4y ago
> Nobody has ever commercially deployed hydrogen storage, Because it wasn't previously useful. Now it is starting to get useful. Do you understand the concept of "change"? That the future is not always like the present? > and most hydrogen is produced via steam reformation. Why do you think that's relevant? > If you do have a plan to make it viable, go talk to VCs and you'll be a billionaire. The billionaires are already doing this. Literally. That specific thing is being done on the orders of the richest person on the planet, as part of a plan to get even richer. He's hardly the only one. This is why a lot of new infrastructure in this field is getting funding and being built. This is why the infrastructure that has been planned and whose construction is in progress is so much larger than what currently exists. This isn't "crossing my fingers and hoping", it's the default outcome unless something else makes it all redundant. All of the issues you're using to doubt this are "throw money at them and they go away" type of problems, and enough money being thrown at them to be interesting. Fusion, sadly, is still in the "throw money at the problems and we expect to find new ones" category.

ben_w 4y ago

> Nobody has ever commercially deployed hydrogen storage, Because it wasn't previously useful. Now it is starting to get useful. Do you understand the concept of "change"? That the future is not always like the present? > and most hydrogen is produced via steam reformation. Why do you think that's relevant? > If you do have a plan to make it viable, go talk to VCs and you'll be a billionaire. The billionaires are already doing this. Literally. That specific thing is being done on the orders of the richest person on the planet, as part of a plan to get even richer. He's hardly the only one. This is why a lot of new infrastructure in this field is getting funding and being built. This is why the infrastructure that has been planned and whose construction is in progress is so much larger than what currently exists. This isn't "crossing my fingers and hoping", it's the default outcome unless something else makes it all redundant. All of the issues you're using to doubt this are "throw money at them and they go away" type of problems, and enough money being thrown at them to be interesting. Fusion, sadly, is still in the "throw money at the problems and we expect to find new ones" category.