Nice idea but fails at almost every level. People were using this as part of the smart grid spiel from about the time Obama chucked gazillions into it. Large lithium storage plants on the supergrid are an interesting idea and potentially very profitable for their operators as, like Dinorwig you take free energy to charge and sell back at £500/MWh. but the grid is balanced in megawatt chunks not a few kw here and there.
You are funny, like a politician, choosing to comment on things that haven't been said in exaggerating soundbite language that sounds authoritative merely because it condescends
Here is a thought for you to consider:
Back in the late sixties some rather brilliant men discovered that you can generate an enormous amount of electrical power using 'molten salt' reactors using 'Thorium' as the prime fuel ingredient. This could be done very safely with little or no risk of any of the problems that plague; what have come to be considered; the more conventional nuclear reactors that we use today.
Now, if the powers that be had taken notice of this technology and run with it, and implemented it's use world wide rather than go down the 'fossil fuel' route we would now be living in a very different world indeed.
Firstly countless tens of millions of people would not have died through airborne pollution. Secondly, reasearch would have been directed mostly toward 'electrical' technologies rather than 'combustion' technologies. Thirdly, we would now be generating many orders of maginitude more electricity than we do now.
The result of this would have meant that most of the world would not now be living without clean water, without power enough to clean and cook and learn and protect and transport themselves, neither without adequate food or sanitation. The list goes on.
The big plus of course is that we would not now be living under the cloud of the effects from climate change brought about by anthropogenic industrial pollution.
Of course this did not happen (too much money to be made from oil and gas and coal to allow 'too cheap to meter' power generation) So everyone is running around throwing windfarms up over our land and sea, and covering larger and larger areas of landscape with solar power in a futile and desperate attempt to make some amends for the mistakes that we have all contributed too. Now these 'green technologies' have a place of sorts but they provide a woefully indadequate amount of power considering the scale of construction required.
It is my belief that we are at a crux in the advancement of the human species and that for us to 'take the next step' (so to speak) we will have to lift our global generating capacity by several orders of magnitude, and to do this we 'must' use our smartest technologies.
Please read 'A Prescription for the Planet' by Tom Blees to (free online) to get a glimpse of an alternative world that could be made possible. While some of his notions and ideas seem fanciful or idealistic, at least he has the desire, like myself, to turn the vast juggernaut of our incompentance driven by economic greed around.
Goodnight 🙏🏻
Back in the late sixties some rather brilliant men discovered that you can generate an enormous amount of electrical power using 'molten salt' reactors using 'Thorium' as the prime fuel ingredient. This could be done very safely with little or no risk of any of the problems that plague; what have come to be considered; the more conventional nuclear reactors that we use today.
Now, if the powers that be had taken notice of this technology and run with it, and implemented it's use world wide rather than go down the 'fossil fuel' route we would now be living in a very different world indeed.
Firstly countless tens of millions of people would not have died through airborne pollution. Secondly, reasearch would have been directed mostly toward 'electrical' technologies rather than 'combustion' technologies. Thirdly, we would now be generating many orders of maginitude more electricity than we do now.
The result of this would have meant that most of the world would not now be living without clean water, without power enough to clean and cook and learn and protect and transport themselves, neither without adequate food or sanitation. The list goes on.
The big plus of course is that we would not now be living under the cloud of the effects from climate change brought about by anthropogenic industrial pollution.
Of course this did not happen (too much money to be made from oil and gas and coal to allow 'too cheap to meter' power generation) So everyone is running around throwing windfarms up over our land and sea, and covering larger and larger areas of landscape with solar power in a futile and desperate attempt to make some amends for the mistakes that we have all contributed too. Now these 'green technologies' have a place of sorts but they provide a woefully indadequate amount of power considering the scale of construction required.
It is my belief that we are at a crux in the advancement of the human species and that for us to 'take the next step' (so to speak) we will have to lift our global generating capacity by several orders of magnitude, and to do this we 'must' use our smartest technologies.
Please read 'A Prescription for the Planet' by Tom Blees to (free online) to get a glimpse of an alternative world that could be made possible. While some of his notions and ideas seem fanciful or idealistic, at least he has the desire, like myself, to turn the vast juggernaut of our incompentance driven by economic greed around.
Goodnight 🙏🏻
Sorry old boy, I feel you are projecting a bit here. I know load balancing using electric cars doesn't work as I've seen the studies. Sadly they are not public domain. However enough is, including some easy to digest documentaries to realise that the national power network is batsrad complex and something that sounds a good idea becomes less sensible when you think about it. ABB has been touting the battery warehouse idea for the last 5 years for example.
But think about it. How many Teslas are needed per MW of grid demand and how do you actually work out which ones to take power from and how to recompense the owners. And how much do you have to pay lloyds for indemnity in case something goes wrong?
G. B. National Grid status is a fun place to visit. This shows what is going on at any one time and historical power demands. Isn't as granular as I would like, but I enjoy mining data for fun.
But think about it. How many Teslas are needed per MW of grid demand and how do you actually work out which ones to take power from and how to recompense the owners. And how much do you have to pay lloyds for indemnity in case something goes wrong?
G. B. National Grid status is a fun place to visit. This shows what is going on at any one time and historical power demands. Isn't as granular as I would like, but I enjoy mining data for fun.
Just for reference, this is the current worlds largest battery storage facility https://library.e.abb.com/public/3c...0500565/Case_Note_BESS_GVEA_Fairbanks-web.pdf .
I know Elon Musk has offered to fix australias problems with batteries, so who knows, maybe a bigger one will come. Lithium of course has its own carbon footprint problems..
I know Elon Musk has offered to fix australias problems with batteries, so who knows, maybe a bigger one will come. Lithium of course has its own carbon footprint problems..
Ah, you have access to secret information. I can't compete with that. I mentioned earlier how you could program you needs for the rest of the day when you plug in at work, I'm sure the rest, billing and reimbursement is not beyond the powers of technology. Also have a more local grid, why not?
Sadly it's nastily complex since deregulation. National grid want power, they have to go to the spot market and buy it. So for example if they think they'll need and extra 50MW for 20 mins after eastenders they literally go out to tender. Dinowig usually gets that of course.
Horrible mess, due to get worse with brexit as the french own most of our generating capacity now backed by the chinese. All so we can switch suppliers. why do we need 50 odd electricity suppliers when its the same electricity?
Horrible mess, due to get worse with brexit as the french own most of our generating capacity now backed by the chinese. All so we can switch suppliers. why do we need 50 odd electricity suppliers when its the same electricity?
Well.........time for a possibly relevant musical interlude....a little habit of mine Bjork - Declare Independence (Official Music Video) - YouTube
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
I detest most public transport in most countries, it sucks big time and I'll do my best to secure private transport for as long as possible. Public transport is generally uncomfortable, inconvenient, noisy, dirty, slooooow, short on amenities and suffers from most things that are public - the problem of the commons.
I'm hoping the long-term will bring us electric powered vehicles and I don't mind turning over control to an autonomous system from time to time either - perhaps compulsory on hi-ways and in city centres. Clearly the requirement will be local energy storage. Our houses will become more dependent on electricity, especially if we charge our cars at home. Existing infrastructure is limited in terms of peak current capability, so we'll want to have power in the grid and to our homes on a constant 'trickle charge' which can be more efficient from a power generation perspective too, with local batteries to provide peak current. Simple really.
I'm hoping the long-term will bring us electric powered vehicles and I don't mind turning over control to an autonomous system from time to time either - perhaps compulsory on hi-ways and in city centres. Clearly the requirement will be local energy storage. Our houses will become more dependent on electricity, especially if we charge our cars at home. Existing infrastructure is limited in terms of peak current capability, so we'll want to have power in the grid and to our homes on a constant 'trickle charge' which can be more efficient from a power generation perspective too, with local batteries to provide peak current. Simple really.
Last edited:
One thing I've been thinking would really help, is downscaling the waste system.
What we make most of in this world, is human waste. The gas often just gets released into the atmosphere, methane is 20-30 times more damaging to the environment than co2 pending on your choice of information source. Tanks that hold the human waste and a cleaning system for the gas so it can be sent right back into the house for all heating purposes, the one thing that can come close to 100% efficiency is heat generation. If you live in a climate where heat or cooking is not a big concern for you, there's always the option for gas turbines.
So not very different to the, considered obsolete, septic tanks, only you harvest the gas as a resource.
What we make most of in this world, is human waste. The gas often just gets released into the atmosphere, methane is 20-30 times more damaging to the environment than co2 pending on your choice of information source. Tanks that hold the human waste and a cleaning system for the gas so it can be sent right back into the house for all heating purposes, the one thing that can come close to 100% efficiency is heat generation. If you live in a climate where heat or cooking is not a big concern for you, there's always the option for gas turbines.
So not very different to the, considered obsolete, septic tanks, only you harvest the gas as a resource.
Last edited:
I've only been on mains sewerage for 2 years since 2003. Round here it's very common. Current system has a digester and soak away which is only 3 years old.
Cannot speak for rest of the world, but in uk waste treatment works (sewage farms) have both aerobic an anaerobic digestion phases. The anaerobic digesters produce methane, which is generally used to drive a generator. You usually get 1-2MW out for an average size works. Sadly the rest of the plant needs a lot of power so that gets used internally, but it's done.
Can't find the link, but in certain parks of Africa there have been pilots of biogas plants from human and bovine waste to provide cooking gas.
And of course landfill sites are being harvested for methane now. All good stuff!
Cannot speak for rest of the world, but in uk waste treatment works (sewage farms) have both aerobic an anaerobic digestion phases. The anaerobic digesters produce methane, which is generally used to drive a generator. You usually get 1-2MW out for an average size works. Sadly the rest of the plant needs a lot of power so that gets used internally, but it's done.
Can't find the link, but in certain parks of Africa there have been pilots of biogas plants from human and bovine waste to provide cooking gas.
And of course landfill sites are being harvested for methane now. All good stuff!
Maybe some still working on some of those ideas ?
http://www.drten.nl/portfolio_item/zeezout-batterij/?lang=en
http://www.drten.nl/portfolio_item/zeezout-batterij/?lang=en
2040 is 23 years in the future. Think back 23 years ago (1994). We have made significant technical strides since then, and the rate is still accelerating. And in ways that it would be hard to image. For instancc did we see a “super-computer” in the hands of many austensibly to make telephone calls?
The twists & turns could take us to very unexpected places.
Probably todays cleanest energy source. We just need to sort out waste issues and i see those as largely political. For new installations one has to look at modern technology (smaller, cheaper, safer), not the 50+ year old dinosaurs that the term nuclear usually brings to mind. And it is only really transitional… when we finially figure out fusion.
There is a powerplant in a southern US desert under construction that uses focused sunlight to melt the salt.
dave
The original work was done at Oak Ridge in the 1940s through the late 60s. It wasn't suitable for shipboard reactor use, so it was shelved in favor of the hot water reactor. The NRC then approved the water reactor for commercial use. The powers that be were aware of it, they didn't want it.
http://moltensalt.org/references/static/downloads/pdf/NAT_MSRintro.pdf
Haha yeah I agree...a laughable target especially given Brexit and our reliance on EU for peak energy demand..... it'll take til 2040 just to get UK supply independence (by relying on EDF and Chinese nuclear)
Interesting. The actual rule will be to produce, for sale as new, no more petrol/diesel vehicles. I doubt it will go further than that as what about the heritage vehicles. My 1965 XLCH 1000 Harley Davidson as an example. The chap next door has a 1970s Triumph Stag, (yes I know it should have been scrapped before it left the production line as they were nothing but trouble) and the countless vehicles running on petrol.
It's just a PR stunt anyway. A random bit of government verbiage that means nothing, has little intent behind it and is aimed to distract media coverage from current male-chicken*-ups and issues...
* - insert correct word as the filter thinks male chickens are obscene... 😀
* - insert correct word as the filter thinks male chickens are obscene... 😀
Last edited:
I hope you meant your tirade more in a comedic sense than legitimately.
Maybe I'm a whackaloon (I am), but outside of being a bit hungrier (burn about 1200-1300 calories/day commuting 30 mi round trip) and an extra load of laundry a week, I don't really see much different. I'd be active anyhow, though, but that's similar to the other long-commuters I know. There's no need for a bigger car nor the incremental A/C (not sure what part of the country you're in, but post shower you're the same comfort level as anyone else). And I'm usually too tired to be social, so I don't even drive that much. 😉 There's no way the incremental externalities of biking come up to the amount of gas I'm not consuming (and adding to traffic, dragging everyone else's mileage down too). My electricity/gas bill is consistently in the lowest quartile as well.
Most bike commuters ride less than 5 miles, and here in Portland, where there's extensive bike commuting (for the US, we've got nothing on the rest of the world), most folks putz along and wear their work clothes. The numbers across the board generally bear this out. Bike commuting isn't for *everyone* but certainly we'd societally benefit (and then you add the salutary health outcomes!) if more people that could easily bike would.
Not going to change the world, but any one solution to the energy problems we have is insufficient. Well, maybe short of dropping our population down to ~1 billion or so. 😉
I've got nothing against the idea of cycling to work, but for me that'd be approx 40Km per day - without any errands on the way home. In cities that didn't initially evolve as cycle-friendly, the costs in terms of "infrastructure upgrades" to provide color coded, protected bike lanes and traffic signals, the elimination of parking and traffic lanes, et al, can be in the millions of dollars for exactly how much "improvement"? Sorry Mayor Lisa, but your agenda is not really helping.
Then you get the sanctimonious (sorry about that word again) sense of entitlement of some of the daily commuters, and most particularly young punks for whom the rules of the road are just general suggestions for old farts- you know, sidewalks are not for cycling, and stop / dismount at crosswalks - at least those at blind corners exiting from mall parking lots. Every "right" bears with it responsibilities.
Then you get the sanctimonious (sorry about that word again) sense of entitlement of some of the daily commuters, and most particularly young punks for whom the rules of the road are just general suggestions for old farts- you know, sidewalks are not for cycling, and stop / dismount at crosswalks - at least those at blind corners exiting from mall parking lots. Every "right" bears with it responsibilities.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.