- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Yeah, I think massive chemical batteries for storing excess electricity to facilitate a contrived green energy market is a bad idea.
Yeah, I think massive chemical batteries for storing excess electricity to facilitate a contrived green energy market is a bad idea.
You’re right, but I think less dense but safer and more sustainable options are the better choice for this
We can all agree on that, Clearly li-ion is a bad choice for static use cases.
But right now it’s the cheapest option, and it looks likely that will stay true for quite a while unfortunately.
It’s the densest option. The cheapest is probably salt/water or iron/water using scrap
LIthium Iron Phosphate is cheapest relatively dense battery type. Sodium ion will be if lithium get expensive.
Weirdly it’s not, except maybe gravity batteries where nice reservoirs happen to exist already. It should be but it’s not right now.
Li-ion has economy of scale right now. I do think molten metal etc will overtake eventually, but they’re currently playing catchup and li-ion has dropped in price so much over time that it’s surprisingly cheap even where it should make no sense.
soooo, dams?
Dams are a normally a power supply rather than a battery. I was more thinking pumped storage hydro. Which is usually done where theres 2 lakes next to each other at very different heights, so you can “store” power by pumping water up and release by pumping back down.
I didn’t say molten metal, what? No just a standard chemical battery
I know, I just threw out one of the many contenders for grid power.
Iron water does look promising too.
Ahh, that makes more sense. I misunderstood