What is Digg?68 Comments
- sarafina42, on 08/21/2008, -0/+15There was just a big breakthrough in solar energy storage by MIT scientists.
http://digg.com/general_sciences/MIT_Major_discove ... - davidryal, on 08/22/2008, -0/+11it would be, if you didn't lose so much energy in the conversion both ways...
- jack12345678910, on 08/22/2008, -2/+11jesus christ, dig really starting to become non news. of course storage is the key. if you even read into renewable energy at all, the main problem is always storage.
- RogerStrong, on 08/22/2008, -0/+7>> Water converted Hydrogen in liquid storage
Too complicated.
Don't convert the water at all. Use the solar/wind power to pump it uphill into a reservoir. When you need the power back, you just run the water back downhill through a traditional hydro-electric generator. - doctechnical, on 08/22/2008, -0/+7At the risk of sounding very silly, how about massive flywheel energy storage? I remember reading an article some time ago (I think in Wired) where a company was selling big heavy-mass flywheel systems to be installed (underground) for use as an uninterruptible power supply. While the grid is up, a trickle of energy keeps the wheel spinning. When the grid goes down you use that inertia to run a generator to keep the juice flowing to your IT center.
Considering they'd be buried, they can be as big as you like and not ruin the view. Or maybe it would work better with a whole bunch of little ones. - Otto, on 08/22/2008, -0/+6Converting hydrogen out of water is probably one of the least efficient ways to store energy there is.
Try again. - Necoras, on 08/22/2008, -0/+6Hydrogen has a bad habit of leaking through everything. Think of a helium balloon after a week. Hydrogen is worse than that, and it'll go through a pipe/tank just a soon as latex. Unless there's some substance which can bind/unbind to it cheaply (like water only without the huge energy loss) then it's not really worth much to you. Even if we do find a material that works like this, you've basically just made a battery. Sorry, but battery tech or ultra caps are the way to go.
- subliminalurge, on 08/22/2008, -0/+5Pumped hydro sounds promising to me, but isn't it going to require HUGE amounts of land to implement on a useful scale?
The resulting lakes would have the added benefit of providing fantastic recreation areas, but things like that usually involve many, many years of politics and red tape.
As an example, I chose a lake close to me that I'm familiar with. This reservoir was built for flood control, not energy storage, but I don't see how the construction obstacles would be much different.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saylorville_Lake
"Construction of the Saylorville Dam was authorized by Congress in 1958. Excavation began at the site in July 1965, becoming fully operational in September of 1977."
That's 8 years from the initial go ahead before the first bulldozer even moved a bit of dirt, and 19 years to having a functioning reservoir. Another issue not mentioned in that wikipedia article is that the entire population of a small town had to be displaced since, well, the spot where the town used to be is now under 40 feet of water.
As an aside, I've often wondered why they don't retrofit a generator into the spillway at the dam. Even with the spillway only slightly open, the water pours through with a whole lot of force. - Wind4ever, on 08/22/2008, -0/+5I would like to clarify Jonnyboy1544's comment and answer arjie's question. Yes turbines are designed to shut down in very high winds. This is a protection feature against turbine damage. Most of the turbines work in wind speeds from 3.5m/s to 25m/s (7.8mph to 56mph). When you think about it 56mph is not regular wind it is a storm. There are trees falling other damage is done, so it is wise to protect the turbines.
The way they shut of is by changing the angle (pitch) of the blades so the wind passes right trough the turbine. Also there is a brake that keeps the rotor steady too.
I should say that winds over 56mph are pretty rare, about 12h to 48h per year the most.
We must also consider the fact that before the wind farm is built there are years of monitoring and studding of the wind climate at the site.
So yes, the Wind farms and Solar plants doesn't have steady power output, but the demand is not steady too...
To balance energy production and demand we have build gas power plants and energy storage systems. This is how we use the coal and nuclear plants too. They can't adjust fast enough to the demand and we need energy storage with fast response time.
There is more to say, but you got the idea... - moocow1452, on 08/22/2008, -1/+6Am I the only one who thought that this was a feature in a USB Flash Drive?
- mementh, on 08/22/2008, -0/+4Having a large low energy loss storage would make any "green" tech more valuable.. the options listed i think are easiest is the hydro pumping and the compressed air or the catalyst option.
But i think the most viable is the hydro which is simple to operate and maintain.
And the compressed air, this gives dual use options. compress the air from excess power overnight using the power plants that have to stay on 24/7. Supposedly they are exceeding the energy used (assumed) so the excess energy will be used to compress the gas and during the day when a higher demand is needed, the gas turbine generators can just use compressed air (to spin things) and then use burning gas when empty. (or a combination if the engine has to be burning, you could run it very lean on fuel to save $$ and make it more economical? - Ragzouken, on 08/22/2008, -2/+6Yeah. Also nuclear power is too complicated. I think we should just have the unemployed pedalling bicycle dynamos.
- timbuckets, on 08/22/2008, -0/+4Hydrogen is the WORST idea ever, unless we can figure out the sudo-photosynthesis to make it. Hydrolysis is more wasteful than cracking high grade natural gas to get hydrogen, though by cracking the CH4 your using up one of our best resources.
- jknight, on 08/22/2008, -0/+4"localized" global warming?
Did you type that with a straight face? - doctechnical, on 08/22/2008, -0/+4As has been already pointed out, H2 really, really wants to get out of whatever you put it in. And once it does get out, it zips up into the higher atmosphere and eats at the ozone layer. Something to keep in mind when considering "green" hydrogen.
- ChildhoodRage, on 08/22/2008, -0/+4Flywheels.
- RockBandit, on 08/22/2008, -0/+4Yeah, Wired had an interesting article back in 2004 about creating a "Hydrogen Economy" in America and using the Southwest's abundance in sunlight to power the electrolysis of water.
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.04/hydrogen. ...
Still though, things like producing the solar cells, as well as keeping hydrogen under pressure are net negative in the whole energy creation process. - inactive, on 08/22/2008, -4/+7Water converted Hydrogen in liquid storage would be the best way to store excess energy.
- RogerStrong, on 08/22/2008, -0/+3>> Also nuclear power is too complicated.
How about "unnecessarily complicated by far". Pumping water is a whole lot easier than a reactor.
>> Suppose I live in Kansas,
Most of the world's population is near the coasts. Most of the rest is near a major river. Thre are slopes near by.
In any case, have a look at Kansas in Google Maps, and turn terrain on. Even within the state you don't have to go far to get a decent level difference. 50 feet is all you need.
I live on the prairie. It's soul-suckingly flat. There's a spot a few minutes from here where there's *nothing* on the horizon in one direction. But all our power comes from hydro-electric dams. They're not here where I am, but they're close enough. - arjie, on 08/22/2008, -0/+3Thermal storage with molten salts. Very high efficiency, someone on digg pointed them out to me:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_energy_storag ... - doctechnical, on 08/22/2008, -0/+3Maybe on really hot days you could pump electricity *into* them, make'm spin backwards, and then they generate a nice cool breeze.
No? - doctechnical, on 08/22/2008, -1/+4"Hey *****, there is no such thing as an "oil power plant."
http://www.power-technology.com/projects/shoaiba/
HTH.HAND. - ausersguide, on 08/22/2008, -0/+3Energon Cubes.
- JorgeGT, on 08/22/2008, -0/+2The problem with storage is that hydrogen has the smaller atoms so... good luck making a trap for them! Also you have nailed it. Chemical storage is always bound to energy loss... so they will be just glorified batteries.
- jonnyboy1544, on 08/22/2008, -0/+2Many of you are probably not aware of this, but wind farms can't operate when the wind blows TOO HARD! You might think the prime time for running a wind farm is when wind speeds are up there right? Wrong... they have to shut them down and use a natural gas backup system. You'd figure when Tropical Storm Fay comes around, we'd have free electricity... NOPE!!
Intermittent sources of energy stink! - timbuckets, on 08/22/2008, -0/+2THANK YOU! This article is simple Common sense! I am blown away that its on the front page (excuse the pun), like this is supposed to be earth shattering new. Guess what, storage is also a problem for non-renewable energy. Else we could store heat from industrial sources and bring it to our homes to heat.
- arjie, on 08/22/2008, -0/+2I'm curious, how do you shut them down, you lock the turbines? Isn't that more dangerous for the machinery?
Honest question. - KirilTodorov, on 08/23/2008, -0/+2We didn't store the energy, what gives us the right to use it? And it is limited since we can't recreate them.
- smurfsahoy, on 08/23/2008, -0/+2Nobody has mention flywheels yet, which I find surprising. Just like pumping water up high, making a big heavy wheel spin really fast involves no phase changes or chemical reactions, but no slopes or huge reservoirs are required... Efficiency of conversion can be 90%.
The technology is also pretty cheap, has a long shelf life (magnetic bearings, etc.), is very environmentally friendly, and they already use it for some pulse power applications on a small scale. - jimfeet, on 08/22/2008, -0/+2@subliminalurge
"Pumped hydro sounds promising to me, but isn't it going to require HUGE amounts of land to implement on a useful scale?"
You tend to see this as a benefit in that it provides "fantastic recreation areas." Yet the opposite can also be true.
Here in Moab, UT (home to Arches and Canyonlands N.P.) a company is petitioning to build a hydro pumping project for peaking power. Their proposed location is in one of the many beautiful canyons which - would effectively destroy hundreds of acres of redrock desert recreation area.
I suspect this project will be fenced off for liability reasons and the constant raising and lowering of the water level will leave a monstrous bathtub ring in what was once a beautiful canyon.
Moab is a tourist-based economy. I fail to see this project as a benefit for anyone and an eyesore for everyone. - locke2002, on 08/22/2008, -0/+2hydro-electric wouldn't work well in flat places. It takes a lot of water and a lot of height to make power. Suppose I live in Kansas, I'd need to build a tank that holds about a dozen tanker trailers full of water one football field above my house, just to power my house for one day.
If you're getting your day power from solar/wind, and charging up the water power for at night, that's a lot less water-height capacity you need, but we'd still need a lot of water towers, in flat regions. - smurfsahoy, on 08/23/2008, -0/+2Read the article at the top of the comments. Solar energy can convert directly to hydrogen. If you can then store it without leaking, it would be vastly superior to batteries, because a simple tank would not require replacing, would be far far cheaper to produce, and would not self-drain over time.
To assume that we can never accomplish something as simple as storing hydrogen is rather ingenuous. - tflowholdings, on 08/22/2008, -0/+2It's already too late. The world is going to end in 2012, sadly
- smurfsahoy, on 08/23/2008, -0/+1metal hydrides are not flammable.
- Barackalypse, on 08/23/2008, -0/+1We already have fantastic dense energy storage devices that are quite inexpensive: coal, uranium, oil and natural gas.
- KirilTodorov, on 08/23/2008, -0/+1Or may be the world we know will end, but a new one will start... not many people really like the world we know anyway :)
- curios, on 08/22/2008, -0/+1How efficient is this process? Does it exceed silicon solar energy generation?
- BigW, on 08/22/2008, -0/+1The problem with electricity has always been storage. Early on Edison was a big proponent of using DC for the power grid. Distribution and storage issues were the big problems back then too.
- wunksta, on 08/23/2008, -0/+1alternative energy efficiency is growing very rapidly
its foolish to say that we shouldnt use them if it works. we should use all available sources. - nick111, on 08/22/2008, -0/+1Idiot.
- timbuckets, on 08/22/2008, -0/+1Some time going to school with the right professors helps- Forth year Energy and the environment with Dr David Keith:
http://www.ucalgary.ca/~keith/papers/65.Decarolis. ... - DrJG, on 08/23/2008, -0/+1leaffan1973 "The problem is the high demand days are usually hot days with little to no wind - no wind no wind generation."
High demand days are hot days - so don't use wind alone. Solar energy will peak on those days precisely, combine it with wind energy. When solar energy is low and you have winter demands you are likely to have wind. Combining seems to be better than going with one. - walkable, on 08/22/2008, -0/+1Duh.
- subliminalurge, on 08/22/2008, -0/+1"Moab is a tourist-based economy. I fail to see this project as a benefit for anyone and an eyesore for everyone."
That's a shame. Done properly, a project like this could be functional AND a boon to recreation/tourism. - DrJG, on 08/23/2008, -0/+1smurfsahoy "Nobody has mention flywheels yet, which I find surprising."
Someone did mention them above. ChildhoodRage was second, the first was doctechnical. Also bincoder.
- jonnyboy1544, on 08/28/2008, -0/+1It's nice that you had to trek across the world to find such a thing. Nice work. Back to reality... in America
Didn't realize I had a LARPer on my hands - ElGstr, on 01/05/2009, -0/+1Cool
Using High Tech For Conservation http://reno.broowaha.com/article.php?id=4327
We Love Sunlight Spills. In this article, How American Energy Independence Was Won, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3907, the author wrote,
“Voila, 4,641,748,800 megawatts a year. America’s heir and a spare to American energy independence. The Feds lease this land to U.S. Solar, Inc. (a strong, proud and patriotic USS for the stock exchange with We Love Sunlight Spills as its’ slogan) for The Nevada Solar Plant. U.S. Solar, Inc. is a red-blooded true blue American capitalist mega-corporation. U.S. Solar, Inc., through it’s Nevada division, Nevada Solar, Inc., gets the usual Federal and State tax subsides and contracts awarded to mega-corporations. A new breed of lobbyist is born, one driving electric cars with a solar panel on every roof. U.S. Solar, Inc. immediately pays it CEO $100 million a year plus perks and bonuses. U.S. Solar, Inc. hires illegals, has zero retirement and health care coverage, is non-union. It charges its’ employees for plugging in their electric cars, and each car has a solar panel on its roof. Ownership of electric cars is a condition to employment and the power generated by the solar panel on each car’s roof belongs to the U.S. Solar, Inc. electric grid. For those just not getting it :-( more ;-) tongue-in-cheek sarcasm going on here. Nevada Solar, Inc pays it CEO $50 million a year plus perks and bonuses. Within two years Nevada Solar, Inc., replicates itself in Montana and other American states, then goes global. It’s Another Great American Story. Brings a tear of patriotic pride to my eye, ‘cause boy, we really won that American War for Energy Independence. “ - KirilTodorov, on 08/22/2008, -0/+1Your plan will take us another 50years further and then... dead END! Pollution, ground and water contamination, depleted recourses... dead END! ... but what you and people thinking like you don't get is that you can't restart the game. ... So better play it wise!
- DrJG, on 08/23/2008, -0/+1Someone did mention them above. ChildhoodRage was second, the first was doctechnical. Also bincoder.
- DrJG, on 08/23/2008, -0/+1High demand days are hot days - so don't use wind alone. Solar energy will peak on those days precisely, combine it with wind energy. When solar energy is low and you have winter demands you are likely to have wind. Combining seems to be better than going with one.
-
Show 51 - 69 of 69 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is