3 ms·
Yes it's relevant and no we didn't all agree it was a bad idea. It generates power at roughly the cost of nuclear. It's distributed and resilient. It works aro
by ZeroGravitas 2y ago
Yes it's relevant and no we didn't all agree it was a bad idea.
It generates power at roughly the cost of nuclear. It's distributed and resilient. It works around sluggish government and/or corporate monopolies. It reduces transmission requirements. It enables and encourages electrification and time-shifting of load. Adding it at build time can be cheaper than tiling.
It’s generally a good thing and we'll see even more if it as the tech progresses and gets cheaper.
- rgmerk 2y agoHate to sound like a broken record but the barrier isn't the technology, the barrier in the USA is permitting and soft costs.
- specialist 2y agoTrue. The opportunities are insurmountable. h/t Yogi Bera
- specialist 2y ago[Given your comment history, as you surely already know...] Yes and: With the rise of "virtual power plants" (VPPs), "all the above" (PV, batteries, EVs, water heaters, HVAC, residential geothermal) will be stitched together to create decentralized, more resilient power grids, capable of peer-to-peer power sharing. Analogy: Remember the term 90s "convergence" (turrible term)? Describing how the computer (digitization) was becoming the everything tool? VPPs (turrible term) is just the electification of "all the things", unifying all energy (heat, electricity) stuff (source, sink, storage). It's a good way to anticipate this interation of "convergence". eg VPPs' analog to "traffic shaping" is "load shaping". eg Just like internet is a network of networks, the "intergrid" will be a network of grids. Etc. It's really easy to see the rough outlines (age of renewable energy) once a person learns of the 100s (1000s?) of puzzle peices currently being assembled. Just reflect on the internet and superimpose those notions onto energy. Thanks for listening.