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

Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

rameznaam.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 231 posts

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#91

Post by wallyhs »

diminoten wrote: post #72
melling wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course replies can be more than superficial. They can contain facts, historical perspective, personal experience, back of the envelope calculations, or qualitative statements from people with specific domain knowledge. After a good HN discussion, there would be enough information for another blog.

No, they can't, because the folks who are commenting at what you think is that level are actually completely unqualified to do so. The folks who are qualified to write articles and papers on the topics that might interest you, do exactly that. There is no inherent value in wasting intellectual effort on an HN comment. The people who comment on HN are not the people who are the most qualified to speak on a topic in de…

> No, they can't, because the folks who are commenting at what you think is that level are actually completely unqualified to do so.

> The folks who are qualified to write articles and papers on the topics that might interest you, do exactly that.

How could you possibly know who is qualified and who is not? Given that the authors of submitted articles frequently comment on HN themselves, it must be true that at least some HN comments are made by qualified people. But that assumes that writing an article is the sole requirement for being "qualified". Not all articles are written by qualified people. Additionally, many articles are watered down by journalists, and HN threads can provide broader perspectives.

> There is no inherent value in wasting intellectual effort on an HN comment.

There is as much inherent value as there is in wasting intellectual effort in a conversation at a dinner party. If I am talking to someone whose life experience is completely different from mine, I am learning something even though they are not rising to the level of their capabilities. I am allowed to learn subjects superficially out of curiosity and without the blessing of an authority figure. I have to choose who to listen to and who to ignore just like I do with other sources of information such as HN submissions.

Asking for sources in response to an unfounded claim is common on HN. I've never seen anyone called naive, greedy, and lazy for it, though. At any rate, asking for a source does not preclude one from researching the topic separately.

I agree that HN should not be put on a pedestal. Neither should the submissions.

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#93

Post by pixl97 »

classicsnoot wrote: post #30
toomuchtodo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wind and solar have a fairly beneficial failure scenario (ie nothing happens, save for the few turbines that have destroyed themselves during adverse conditions). You'll never be able to compete with that, fission, fusion, whatever. We still don't know where to put the waste, we still refuse to acknowledge the ability to reprocess said waste, and so forth. You don't even need more storage to run wind and solar as bas…

In my limited experience [1 windmill that i am currently working on] the biggest issue we are facing is lightning strike. The windmill is located on a small island .6 miles off of the coast of Maine. the structure rises 20+ feet over the tops of the trees. The Seawind is pretty consistent so wind seemed like a good idea, but the first strike fried the innards of the turbine and compromised the lines running to the ba…

Like the other poster said, lightning can be dealt with, but I'm very glad I don't have your problem. You are dealing with the worst possible combinations of landscape and expense. My honest answer is you need a specialist with the proper testing equipment measure the resistance to earth at your location. If it is very high you will likely need deep holes dug (reading about one mountain top location that needed 600' to get proper grounding, you shouldn't need anything that extreme). The combination of a chemical grounding system in a well shaft may overcome your grounding issue. But, without that proper ground any lightning protection on your tower is apt not to be the shortest path to earth and will likely fail.

http://www.copper.org/applications/electrical/pq/casestudy/m...

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#94

Post by teamonkey »

jhallenworld wrote: post #43

Push a train up a hill to store energy. Yes, someone is really doing this: http://www.aresnorthamerica.com/

That uses more-or-less the same principle as pumped-storage hydroelectricity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#95

Post by toomuchtodo »

7952 wrote: post #49
jimktrains2 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nuclear plants take years to build and have shitty failure scenarios That's only because we won't build any newer designs that don't have shitty failure modes and insist that we keep old reactors with very shitty failure modes online, though.

Surely the main cause of failure is human rather than the actual design. Nuclear stations may be safe, but that comes at an increasing cost in money and complexity. How do we deal with the institutional failings that allowed us to build "old reactors with very shitty failure modes". Stop blaming it on the tech. I want reactors that are simple enough to be cheap and easy.

> Stop blaming it on the tech. I want reactors that are simple enough to be cheap and easy.

Find a way to put people in charge who aren't irresponsibly incompetent then. Until then, nuclear isn't a feasible option.

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#96

Post by afarrell »

exelius wrote: post #33
api wrote: post #3

If we do get cheap scalable energy storage, it's pretty much game over (in the long run) for everything but solar and wind. We are basically drenched in free energy, but we can't store it cheaply enough. If that's fixed, we're done here. Nuclear fission may still have on-paper advantages in some markets/climates, but the high PITA (pain in the aXX) factor would probably mean we wouldn't bother going there. We'd just…

Actually; cheap storage makes the argument for nuclear energy even better. Nuclear is very bad at responding to demand because it can take weeks or months to restart a nuclear reactor. Under any scenario, you're going to need some kind of power grid. That grid is going to have a non-zero "base" load as batteries charge, etc. Nuclear is perfect for generating this base load - it's reliable, clean and not subject to th…

The problem for nuclear is that with the way the bulk electricity market works, shaving off the peaks could hurt the ROI of building a new nuclear plant significantly. In New York and New England, suppliers bid in how much power they are willing to supply at a given price, the market operator runs a giant LP solver over the bids and transmission constraints between locations in order to satisfy demand in each location, every supplier that is scheduled in a given location gets paid the price of the marginal watt in that location. So nuclear plants bid negative to make sure they get scheduled and rely on other positive-price sources getting scheduled in order to turn a profit.

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#97

Post by greggyb »

beat wrote: post #86
greggyb wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is, of course, speculative. We don’t know if the study findings scale to the whole of the United States. It’s back of the envelope math. Atop that, the study itself is an analysis, which is not the same value as experience. Hence my question. Do we actually see any utilities making steps in this direction?

They're openly talking about it. Let's look again in ten years, given the lead time, conservatism, and regulatory concerns at this scale. "Fail fast" isn't really an option for the grid the way it is for software startups.

I realize I may have come across somewhat pugnaciously above. I am honestly curious about this, though.

What utilities/where are talking about this right now? What level of talk are we talking about? Public statements? Designs? Construction permits in the works?

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#98

Post by Guvante »

hueving wrote: post #60
Guvante wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that an arbitrage opportunity will not always be available does not mean that arbitrage opportunity does not exist. Also electricity companies would be very slow to adjust to reduced demand by lowering prices, making this work for longer than a naive analysis would predict.

>The fact that an arbitrage opportunity will not always be available does not mean that arbitrage opportunity does not exist. Spotting a leftover cookie on the table means you will probably be able to get a free cookie. It doesn't mean that you have found a way to solve world hunger.

Everything you have said can be said about literally every possible opportunity to make money outside of those that leverage sweat equity.

If you want to say something about his idea that is specific you could add value.

For instance attempting this arbitrage is a risk transference since you are betting that the technology of batteries won't catch up before you have made back your capital investment.

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#99

Post by diminoten »

wallyhs wrote: post #91
diminoten wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they can't, because the folks who are commenting at what you think is that level are actually completely unqualified to do so. The folks who are qualified to write articles and papers on the topics that might interest you, do exactly that. There is no inherent value in wasting intellectual effort on an HN comment. The people who comment on HN are not the people who are the most qualified to speak on a topic in de…

> No, they can't, because the folks who are commenting at what you think is that level are actually completely unqualified to do so. > The folks who are qualified to write articles and papers on the topics that might interest you, do exactly that. How could you possibly know who is qualified and who is not? Given that the authors of submitted articles frequently comment on HN themselves, it must be true that at least…

So you think I'm speaking to you as an authority figure?

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#100

Post by steve19 »

beat wrote: post #81

One of the best things about the solar/wind + storage combination is that it's decentralized and cheap at small scale. This makes serious electrification of remote and impoverished places viable. It reminds me of the wildfire spread of cell service in places that didn't have phones before, only on a larger and more important scale. Give a village cheap electricity, and awesome things will happen. This gets to another…

Westerners arguing that Nuclear is better for them in no way means solar is not better for an African village in the middle of nowhere....

Or are you arguing that Westerns should adopt solar so that African villagers get slightly cheaper solar? That seems like an inefficient form of aid.

On a side note: solar is not cheap on a small scale, it might be convenient, green, safe, etc. but not cheap (cheap infers low cost versus conventional power generation)

Post reply on HN