4 ms·
That's a physics-based assumption, not an engineering-based one. Unlike the effect on nuclear fusion, the idea of using SC as storage devices is pretty much pu
by choeger 3y ago
That's a physics-based assumption, not an engineering-based one.
Unlike the effect on nuclear fusion, the idea of using SC as storage devices is pretty much pure theory.
Edit: it's currently leaving the theory part at MW scales as pointed out below. That makes using LK-99 much more likely. But using LK-99 in a SC storage device is still theoretical.
- TheLoafOfBread 3y agoIt is actually used and it exists. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energy_storage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energ... See applications
- choeger 3y agoThat's neat, but it misses the point. LK-99 is not even available for engineering, yet. You might be able to use one of the existing designs. Maybe you need to come up with a new design. But you cannot do that just yet.
- jacquesm 3y ago> But using LK-99 in a SC storage device is still theoretical. Of course it is, any kind of use of this stuff is still theoretical. That's a content free statement. But GP was making the assumption that if it works it can be used for storage. But that doesn't really follow from the properties of the material as described so far. You'd need a lot more current carrying capacity for that to become a realistic possibility.