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

We're going to need a lot of solar panels

caseyhandmer.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 842 posts

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#11

Post by goethes_kind »

l1n wrote: post #7
walrus01 wrote: post #4

We're going to need a lot of solar panels and an efficient way to transport power from a very sunny place to another location where the loads are. For instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_DC_Intertie The pacific DC intertie right now often ends up being used to transport power from hydroelectric dams in WA/OR to California. But there's nothing to say that something couldn't function the other way if there…

Because their value prop is to generate synthetic fuel instead.

You need synthetic fuel anyway to act as energy storage/buffer.

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#12

Post by toomuchtodo »

walrus01 wrote: post #10
toomuchtodo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HVDC or interconnects (losses are tolerable with enough renewables generation, considering existing curtailment), battery storage, and renewables generated ammonia for on demand combustion (chemical storage) will meet these needs. "Build, Baby, Build", with my apologies to Sarah Palin. Edit: with 1200GW of renewables capacity, the US has produced 20% of its energy from renewables this year, more than nuclear. Based o…

If the $ per Wh cost from PV is extremely low it's also possible to use electrical heating elements to store heat in tanks of something that melts and stays hot for long periods of time (for building heating purposes). Or to use cheap mid day electric power when the sun is up to generate gigantic blocks of ice that can then be used with cooling loops to air condition buildings.

Absolutely. California alone is curtailing enormous amounts of renewables, hundreds of thousands of MWh/month (depending on the season). That is literally clean energy being thrown away (which, depending on system design, is variably tolerable; you're balancing cost, transmission congestion, and renewables offsetting fossil combustion). More transmission, more batteries, more storage, more load shifting (both temporal and geographic)? All of the above.

https://www.caiso.com/informed/Pages/ManagingOversupply.aspx

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#13

Post by oceanplexian »

walrus01 wrote: post #4

We're going to need a lot of solar panels and an efficient way to transport power from a very sunny place to another location where the loads are. For instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_DC_Intertie The pacific DC intertie right now often ends up being used to transport power from hydroelectric dams in WA/OR to California. But there's nothing to say that something couldn't function the other way if there…

On one hand it’s an interesting engineering challenge, but I am always perplexed how covering hundreds of square km of an ecosystem with glass is “good for the environment”. It sounds like something future generations will shake their heads at while trying to dispose of all the toxic waste.

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#16

Post by AdamTReineke »

woah wrote: post #3

Is this better or worse than the one where they are cooking corn husks to make oil to squirt into the ground?

This is better. Terraform believes they can make methane from the air for cheaper than it can be extracted from the ground, leading to a preference for "carbon neutral" fuels. Part of their thesis though is the requirement for solar to keep getting cheaper and cheaper (as it has).

Excess manufactured methane could also be injected underground, presumably.

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#17

Post by walrus01 »

oceanplexian wrote: post #13
walrus01 wrote: post #4

We're going to need a lot of solar panels and an efficient way to transport power from a very sunny place to another location where the loads are. For instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_DC_Intertie The pacific DC intertie right now often ends up being used to transport power from hydroelectric dams in WA/OR to California. But there's nothing to say that something couldn't function the other way if there…

On one hand it’s an interesting engineering challenge, but I am always perplexed how covering hundreds of square km of an ecosystem with glass is “good for the environment”. It sounds like something future generations will shake their heads at while trying to dispose of all the toxic waste.

I'm not saying pave over the mojave desert with PV, exactly, rather that a dry salt pan or ecosystem that has an absolute minimum of flora and fauna would be preferable.

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

creating massive hydroelectric dam reservoirs also has ecological costs

in terms of toxic waste it would surely be preferable to the percentage of electricity right now that is generated using gas, heavy fuel oil and coal.

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#18

Post by AdamTReineke »

intrepidhero wrote: post #14

I get sabatier and electrolysis but what is a CO2 concentrator? Or rather how does it work? I thought that was the expensive and relatively unknown part of the process. Aside: Sweet company website https://terraformindustries.com/

Their white paper covers it, linked from their site.

> CO2 concentration is performed using a closed lime/calcite calcination cycle, operating at ambient temperature and pressure.

https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2022/02/03/terraform-indu...

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#19

Post by goethes_kind »

oceanplexian wrote: post #13
walrus01 wrote: post #4

We're going to need a lot of solar panels and an efficient way to transport power from a very sunny place to another location where the loads are. For instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_DC_Intertie The pacific DC intertie right now often ends up being used to transport power from hydroelectric dams in WA/OR to California. But there's nothing to say that something couldn't function the other way if there…

On one hand it’s an interesting engineering challenge, but I am always perplexed how covering hundreds of square km of an ecosystem with glass is “good for the environment”. It sounds like something future generations will shake their heads at while trying to dispose of all the toxic waste.

Matter of interpretation. Is humanity at all good for the environment? Some would say no. Solar is clean and deserts are mostly, well, deserts. And climate change seems much worse than having a tiny bit of our deserts being used for PV farms.

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#20

Post by dangerlibrary »

walrus01 wrote: post #4

We're going to need a lot of solar panels and an efficient way to transport power from a very sunny place to another location where the loads are. For instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_DC_Intertie The pacific DC intertie right now often ends up being used to transport power from hydroelectric dams in WA/OR to California. But there's nothing to say that something couldn't function the other way if there…

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN