Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Goldman Sachs invests $250M in compressed air energy storage

canarymedia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 325 posts

Re: Goldman Sachs invests $250M in compressed air energy storage

#121

Post by cjrp »

samstave wrote: post #116
AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #105

In early 20th century in London there was an alternative hydraulic "power grid" with plants (aka pumps), storages and an underground distribution network of pipes. A building, for example, could connect to high pressure water mains and use it to power elevators. Electricity eventually won, but it's interesting to see an idea coming back. Zeppelins next! [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Hydraulic_Power_Company

There also used to be "central turbines" whereby there was a central spinning rod that one could attach belts to in order to spin a thing to get work out of it... called line and shaft https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qt5tltnvF8

Really cool, sort of like how an ICE drives ancillaries

Re: Goldman Sachs invests $250M in compressed air energy storage

#123

Post by xhkkffbf »

karmakaze wrote: post #51
slingnow wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you name a method of large scale energy storage that isn't dangerous if done incorrectly?

I think the comment is more about being easy to do incorrectly/dangerously. Pumping water up into a reservoir seems easier/safer.

Read up on the Johnstown Flood.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnstown_Flood

Re: Goldman Sachs invests $250M in compressed air energy storage

#124

Post by buryat »

boringg wrote: post #11

GS isn't known for their scientific prowess - signal that they believe there is money in large scale ESS. Not sure if it's validating the technology at all though. Compressed air has been around for a long time at this point.

the governments should invest instead i agree but it doesn't hurt if a private venture can help us all

Re: Goldman Sachs invests $250M in compressed air energy storage

#126

Post by PBnFlash »

u320 wrote: post #63
PBnFlash wrote: post #61

Air is kind of a shitty working fluid. I always kind of dismiss compressed air storage because of that. I saw a video recently that pumped water into tanks and used used the air as a spring. Just dip a pipe down and use the air to move the water. Extracting energy from a hyrdo generator. https://youtu.be/sBF5EnK9MPs

Isn't that just pumped hydro? You would need similar masses of water.

I imagine it will get better performance from high pressure water instead of the few psi of a small elevation change.

Re: Goldman Sachs invests $250M in compressed air energy storage

#127

Post by EricE »

epistasis wrote: post #67

Grid storage is going to be big business in the future, on the order of size of storage for electrical vehicles. (And these will certainly not be mutually exclusive markets! Vehicle to grid tech will become widespread, as is already seen in the new F150 Lightning truck). Lithium ion will dominate for the foreseeable future, as the industry has scaled to massive sizes and already, and has the advantage of being curren…

Lithium Ion is not sustainable for the long term - we have neither the materials nor the manufacturing to not only keep up what would be required for full scale car and grid uses, but don't forget Lithium Ion batteries have a finite lifespan and need to be replaced. The more you put into service, the more you have to manufacture beyond just the batteries needed for new requirements.

Re: Goldman Sachs invests $250M in compressed air energy storage

#128

Post by nkurz »

benreesman wrote: post #94
JohnL4 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing not. Earth's heat is way lower down. Think of a cave: always cold. I think what's going on is they're taking the heat out and storing it more efficiently than just dumping it down the ground, where (1) it would leak away, representing energy loss, and (2) as it leaks away, the air would lose pressure. (It would leak away b/c it's harder to insulate an entire mine, basically.) So, they pull it out ahead o…

This comment is an example of why I’ve become skeptical of the downvote button. It sounds like people read it, knew better, and politely pointed out that it was incorrect. Everyone who might have shared the same misapprehension learned something and the parent wasn’t being an asshole. Doesn’t that add to the discussion?

Yes, when considered along with the corrective responses, it adds to the discussion. This is why it shouldn't be flagged and removed. On the other hand, it's factually wrong and would be misleading if people were to trust the claims uncritically, which I think justifies a downvote. Keeping it visible but lower on the page and showing it in gray seems like a pretty good compromise. Can you suggest a better way of giving more prominence to correct information? Or do you think that's not the right priority for the site?

Re: Goldman Sachs invests $250M in compressed air energy storage

#129

Post by spenczar5 »

cjrp wrote: post #121
samstave wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There also used to be "central turbines" whereby there was a central spinning rod that one could attach belts to in order to spin a thing to get work out of it... called line and shaft https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qt5tltnvF8

Really cool, sort of like how an ICE drives ancillaries

Cool indeed, but pretty dangerous and difficult to reconfigure. Electric wires and motors are so much smaller, and easier to protect, and more interoperable, so you can see why they won out.

Re: Goldman Sachs invests $250M in compressed air energy storage

#130

Post by sauwan »

The round trip efficiencies for these compressed air storage have typically been terrible (ETA: Just saw the video. Looks like they store the heat to boost generation on the return trip. This [1] says they get ~60% efficiency.

[1] https://www.inceptivemind.com/hydrostor-build-largest-compre...

Post reply on HN