27 ms·
> If you’re using them as home storage batteries once or twice a year it’s probably not going to hurt the lifespan too much. For much of the world, the dim day
by nomel 3y ago
> If you’re using them as home storage batteries once or twice a year it’s probably not going to hurt the lifespan too much.
For much of the world, the dim days of winter are much longer than a few days. Storage couldn't work for these places. Taking clean energy from distance places would be required.
- rgmerk 3y agoYes and no. Yes, I get that winter lasts for months and agree that you can't possibly store enough energy in chemical batteries to cover it all. However, demand peaks by definition occur only for short periods, and shaving those peaks reduces the need for grid infrastructure compared to what you would need otherwise.
- nomel 3y ago> reduces the need for grid infrastructure Maybe I'm misreading this, but the infrastructure couldn't be reduced. Battery storage acts as a filter, allowing you to optimize the transition for both sides of the duck curve [1], but reducing infrastructure, as in removing plants, can't be done somewhere that can have its power generation halved by a passing tropical storm. If you're saying "reduce dirty power", then yes. :) As a side note, here's some interesting graphs I just found: California: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/California-daily-power-generation-accumulation-curves-and-demand-curve-313-Mechanisms_fig2_346482723 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/California-daily-power-g... Germany: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Germany-daily-power-generation-accumulation-curves-and-demand-curve-323-Mechanisms-to_fig3_346482723 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Germany-daily-power-gene... Everything is so flat in Germany! Including demand!