4 ms·
Nobody needs can't-do engineers. So he found out that lead-acid batteries aren't enough. 1) A fleet of electric/plug-in hybrid cars are a pretty big battery.
by mohawk 12y ago
Nobody needs can't-do engineers.
So he found out that lead-acid batteries aren't enough.
1) A fleet of electric/plug-in hybrid cars are a pretty big battery. Build more of those.
2) Power-to-gas seems like a good avenue, too. It also has an existing infrastructure.
http://www.eon.com/en/media/news/press-releases/2014/9/1/eon-power-to-gas-pilot-unit-falkenhagen.html http://www.eon.com/en/media/news/press-releases/2014/9/1/eon...
You can also generate methane instead of hydrogen. Not super-efficient at the moment, i know. But a solvable problem.
But this article originally stated we would need fusion to be able to survive without conventional fuels.
Solving the storage problem of renewables just seems so much easier than achieving nuclear fusion.
- DennisP 12y agoAnd using advanced fission seems easier than either. We need engineers attempting to solve all these problems. But what we don't need is people assuming that hard problems are already solved, and that other lines of research therefore aren't important.
- mohawk 12y agoSure, just insure your advanced fission reactors against desaster with a prudent insurer instead of relying on the government to bail you out in case anything happens. Proving something with long-tail risk is secure takes ages. There are just too many ways to store energy to go through them here, and it doesn't make sense to take any single one and claim it cannot scale to the problem at hand. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the difficulty of storing energy vs. getting nuclear fusion working. I think fusion would be great to have and research is important, but i'm also glad that we don't need to get it working real soon now.