Why Our Antiquated Power Grid Needs Battery Storage
Lucas123 writes: Last year, renewable energy sources accounted for half of new installed electric-generation capacity (natural gas units made up most of the remainder). As more photovoltaic panels are installed on rooftops around the nation, an antiquated power grid is being overburdened by a bidirectional load its was never engineered to handle. The Hawaiian Electric Company, for example, said it's struggling with electricity "backflow" that could destabilize its system. Batteries for distributed renewable power has the potential to mitigate the load on the national grid by allowing a redistribution of power during peak hours. Because of this, Tesla, which is expected to announce batteries for homes and utilities on Thursday, and others are targeting a market estimated to be worth $1.2B by 2019. Along with taking up some of the load during peak load, battery capacity can be used when power isn't being generated by renewable systems, such as at night and during inclement weather. That also reduces grid demand.
There are other -- probably cheaper -- solutions for local storage than batteries.
A couple of off-the-cuff examples: lifting a very large weight with your excess electricity, then running a generator with it during peak loads or periods. (Did I say VERY large weight?)
Another would be pumped hydro storage. Build a -- yet again very large -- tank at a height. During excess generation periods, use the electricity to pump water into the tank. During peak periods, use the water to turn a generator and reclaim the electricity.
All such systems have inefficiencies, even batteries. But pumped storage and other such solutions are used on a very large scale today... and should be quite workable for the small scale as well. Another advantage of pumped storage is that you now have a nice, big, full water tank with gravity feed in case of zombie apocalypse or whatever.
Spoken by someone who truly does not understand how unstable an electric grid really is. If there is more power injected into the grid than there is demand very bad things happen.
To be fair, solar is pretty much effectively infinite.
When it runs out, we're gonna be dead anyway, unless we've managed to colonize other planets by then.
Just because someone doesn't jump on the first "solution" you see doesn't mean that they are not aware of the problem.
The problem is we have no one proposing truly reasonable alternatives. Instead of patching what they call our "antiquated" power grid, perhaps we should actually rethink it. The renewable energy sources have a common problem because they cannot provide power when it is needed with suitable reliability. Allowing people to generate power using solar and wind, use it what they want and sell the rest to utilities sounds very good, but it does not reduce the peak capacity that the utilities must have, further it increases the swing between peak and minimum meaning the utilities must have capacity that can be brought online quickly and shutdown quickly, sometimes several times a day. These "green" energy sources are not nearly as green as they could be in a properly integrated power grid. Patching batteries into the grid just delays a properly engineered solution. Industrial power users are one of the keys to success since they have the greatest financial interest in the cost of power, and have the resources to capitalize the solutions. Having the smallest/smallish users capitalize the grid is stupid because they can't pay for it upfront and if made compulsory, they will pay while industry profits. A smart grid where your car and laptop charge at times of minimal demand/maximum availability is also likely to be needed. With a proper design we won't be wasting huge amounts of resources as we iterate towards a solution.
The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
And who would that be? Last I checked, coal, gas and oil let you shit your externalities all over other people's environment (and lungs, real estate and insurance costs), and nuclear is impossible due to political reasons.
Wind is more expensive than fossil fuels only as long as you force me to suck up the fumes from your smokestack and tailpipe and consequently die horribly from lung cancer for free. Not to mention the fact fossils will run out eventually, leaving to future generations sitting in the dark if the alternatives are not in place by then.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Save your breath - this is the guy who wrote the following (without sources or analysis) just a few posts down:
The whole problem with most "Green Power" solutions is they are little more than excuses to pick people's pockets.
If someone can say that with a straight face, they are not willing to learn, and seem to be proud of that fact.
Solar panels do wear out a little bit ...
They are "doted" Silicium, that means one side is p-doted the other side n-doted. Due to heat those two sides start to intermix and in the end the efficiency of the cell goes down or even vanishes to zero.
Electricity can wear out.
Nope.
Granted it takes a while. but over time electric cables wear out.
Nope.
Then you have the insulation materials which ear out faster, when those break you get shorts.
Nope. Long distance high voltage lines are not even insulated. They last for ever unless they corrode.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.