3 ms·

Something that everyone is going to need to get used to is that with carbon-free, cost-free primary inputs the emphasis on efficiency that we have historically

Something that everyone is going to need to get used to is that with carbon-free, cost-free primary inputs the emphasis on efficiency that we have historically known is going to disappear. It fundamentally does not matter if something that we need to make the system work loses a few percent of the energy.

Krssst 2y ago
It does when the grid is running on batteries for extended periods of time. I guess it just comes down to what is cheaper between x% more batteries and y% larger conductors.
- cameldrv 2y ago
  If the solar is remote and the batteries are near the load though you don’t need any more batteries in this situation, just more panels.
  - thfuran 2y ago
    That doesn't sound free.
  - bcrl 2y ago
    Colocating batteries with panels should be more cost effective as they can avoid the DC-AC-DC conversion while using half as many inverters as 2 separate installations.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
naming_the_user 2y ago
That's not new at all - we already accept ICE's losing a ton of energy as heat, we accepted incandescent light bulbs losing a ton of energy as heat, etc. It's more like we have to resist calls for everything to use the minimum amount of energy possible when the relevant thing really is minimising externalities.