Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
davieG

Technology, Science and the Environment.

By davieG, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, worth_the_wait said:

Sorry, I thought you understood what I meant by "you can't really store electricity as such."    
 
You can only "store electricity" in a capacitor, and you generally can't store that much of it in the real world.   Most electricity grids are based around generating it, when it is actually needed.  So for example, at half time of a big football match, when millions of people go and put the kettle on ... the authorities will bring onstream whatever they need to generate the corresponding electricity eg bring up a gas-fired power station, or bring wind farms online etc.
 
When you talk colloquially about "storing electricity", what you actually mean is a device that has energy stored in a form that can be converted back into electricity.   So in the case of a rechargeable battery ... you plug it into the mains, use electricity to make chemical changes to the battery ie store chemical energy ("charge it up").  Then at a future point in time, the battery can be used to generate an electrical current - for whatever you want to do.   But the battery isn't actually storing electricity.

 

In the same way, when you have excess electricity generated, you could use it to pump water up a mountain.   You are then storing gravitational energy.   When you need to generate electricity again, you can let the water run downhill and through a turbine.   But as per the example above with a battery, you're not actually storing electricity.   You are doing something that gives you the means to generate electricity as and when you need it.   That's what Pumped Storage Hydro (PSH) schemes are.

 

Hopefully that explains it a bit better.
 

With all of this in mind, I'd be interested to hear what you would think is the best way forward.

  • Popular Post
worth_the_wait

worth_the_wait

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
On 13/12/2024 at 08:01, leicsmac said:

With all of this in mind, I'd be interested to hear what you would think is the best way forward.

My jumbled thoughts, in no particular order ...

 

We've already shut down all the coal-fired power stations, so there's nothing more we can do there.  That's a massive reduction in CO2.

 

Get rid of the remaining oil-fired power stations.

 

Nuclear fusion is the holy grail, but whilst we've got further with it ... we always seem to be "15-20 years off commercial production".   We still need to keep developing it, but it's a medium/long term solution.

 

Whilst any form of nuclear fission has its downside, I think we need go down the Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) route - at least as a means of increasing our base load capability.

 

No more solar farms.  Covering valuable farmland in the SE of Britain with solar farms is bonkers, if you actually think about the amount of time they are productive.   But I'm all in favour of putting solar panels on waste land, tops of commercial buildings, car parks, industrial units etc.   And it makes sense to encourage all households to have solar panels and battery storage, to at least provide domestic resilience and take load of the grid at critical times.

 

Increase the amount of hydro generated electricity.  There's a massive opportunity here, just be diverting some running water through a pipe into a generator ... and then doing it again umpteen times down the length of a river.   Or over every weir in the country.   And apart from during a drought when river levels are really low, it's a pretty much reliable source of power.

 

The existing Pumped Storage Hydro (PSH) schemes are great, but can't see much chance of building any more.

 

Build some more offshore wind farms, but these need to go alongside developing "energy storage" capabilities.   I'm not sure battery storage will scale up anywhere near the levels needed.   Liquid Air Energy Storage (LAES) might be a better solution.  It would take a lot of these to give the required resilience, but would be more environmentally friendly - and not needing access to all the various rare minerals needed in battery production.

 

Keep gas fired power stations as the standby.  It's not ideal, but it's the least worst of the fossil fuels.

 

In time, phase out the biomass plants, as they're not really quite as "carbon neutral" as made out.   But it's going to be a while before we'll be anywhere near decommissioning Drax.

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
jgtuk

jgtuk

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, worth_the_wait said:

My jumbled thoughts, in no particular order ...

 

We've already shut down all the coal-fired power stations, so there's nothing more we can do there.  That's a massive reduction in CO2.

 

Get rid of the remaining oil-fired power stations.

 

Nuclear fusion is the holy grail, but whilst we've got further with it ... we always seem to be "15-20 years off commercial production".   We still need to keep developing it, but it's a medium/long term solution.

 

Whilst any form of nuclear fission has its downside, I think we need go down the Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) route - at least as a means of increasing our base load capability.

 

No more solar farms.  Covering valuable farmland in the SE of Britain with solar farms is bonkers, if you actually think about the amount of time they are productive.   But I'm all in favour of putting solar panels on waste land, tops of commercial buildings, car parks, industrial units etc.   And it makes sense to encourage all households to have solar panels and battery storage, to at least provide domestic resilience and take load of the grid at critical times.

 

Increase the amount of hydro generated electricity.  There's a massive opportunity here, just be diverting some running water through a pipe into a generator ... and then doing it again umpteen times down the length of a river.   Or over every weir in the country.   And apart from during a drought when river levels are really low, it's a pretty much reliable source of power.

 

The existing Pumped Storage Hydro (PSH) schemes are great, but can't see much chance of building any more.

 

Build some more offshore wind farms, but these need to go alongside developing "energy storage" capabilities.   I'm not sure battery storage will scale up anywhere near the levels needed.   Liquid Air Energy Storage (LAES) might be a better solution.  It would take a lot of these to give the required resilience, but would be more environmentally friendly - and not needing access to all the various rare minerals needed in battery production.

 

Keep gas fired power stations as the standby.  It's not ideal, but it's the least worst of the fossil fuels.

 

In time, phase out the biomass plants, as they're not really quite as "carbon neutral" as made out.   But it's going to be a while before we'll be anywhere near decommissioning Drax.

 

Excellent post :appl:

  • Like 2
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, worth_the_wait said:

My jumbled thoughts, in no particular order ...

 

We've already shut down all the coal-fired power stations, so there's nothing more we can do there.  That's a massive reduction in CO2.

 

Get rid of the remaining oil-fired power stations.

 

Nuclear fusion is the holy grail, but whilst we've got further with it ... we always seem to be "15-20 years off commercial production".   We still need to keep developing it, but it's a medium/long term solution.

 

Whilst any form of nuclear fission has its downside, I think we need go down the Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) route - at least as a means of increasing our base load capability.

 

No more solar farms.  Covering valuable farmland in the SE of Britain with solar farms is bonkers, if you actually think about the amount of time they are productive.   But I'm all in favour of putting solar panels on waste land, tops of commercial buildings, car parks, industrial units etc.   And it makes sense to encourage all households to have solar panels and battery storage, to at least provide domestic resilience and take load of the grid at critical times.

 

Increase the amount of hydro generated electricity.  There's a massive opportunity here, just be diverting some running water through a pipe into a generator ... and then doing it again umpteen times down the length of a river.   Or over every weir in the country.   And apart from during a drought when river levels are really low, it's a pretty much reliable source of power.

 

The existing Pumped Storage Hydro (PSH) schemes are great, but can't see much chance of building any more.

 

Build some more offshore wind farms, but these need to go alongside developing "energy storage" capabilities.   I'm not sure battery storage will scale up anywhere near the levels needed.   Liquid Air Energy Storage (LAES) might be a better solution.  It would take a lot of these to give the required resilience, but would be more environmentally friendly - and not needing access to all the various rare minerals needed in battery production.

 

Keep gas fired power stations as the standby.  It's not ideal, but it's the least worst of the fossil fuels.

 

In time, phase out the biomass plants, as they're not really quite as "carbon neutral" as made out.   But it's going to be a while before we'll be anywhere near decommissioning Drax.

 

Yeah, I think that sounds pretty much spot on tbh.

 

It's a long term project though, so it requires consistent governments willing to back a plan like that, and additionally backing plans to have support for similar schemes across the world. Unfortunately, I fear that is in no way guaranteed given a statistically significant proportion of people appear to not even think there is a problem at all and that somehow humans have more power than nature in terms of devastating consequences to our actions.

reporterpenguin

reporterpenguin

Posted
Posted

I've always thought tidal was a no brainer for the UK. 

 

Vast coastlines, completely predictable, out of the way, it seems perfect. I don't know much about why it isn't bigger than it is, presumably the construction cost is pretty high?

 

As for storage do fill in for when renewables aren't producing much, a complete rethink of the grid to take advantage of the increasing number of high capacity batteries sat on driveways needs to happen. Most cars spend so little time actually driving, and as the number of EVs increases we have a huge opportunity to tap into that storage. Even if 20% of a cars capacity was optionally offered up to the grid to ensure the car has the power to be used if needed, that could be huge in terms of handling demand.

 

While fusion is the golden bullet, it does feel like we already have all the building blocks needed to have a clean energy. It's just a matter of working out how the blocks fit together, and how to handle the initial cost of the switch that will save money in the long run.

blabyboy

blabyboy

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, reporterpenguin said:

I've always thought tidal was a no brainer for the UK. 

 

Vast coastlines, completely predictable, out of the way, it seems perfect. I don't know much about why it isn't bigger than it is, presumably the construction cost is pretty high?

Silt build up is often vastly underestimated, especially on estuaries which is where you would want to locate the bigger plants.

  • Like 1
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted

Unpopular opinion:

 

Space is a global commons, should be explored as such, and before US and Chinese (or any other third party) get involved in a pissing contest, whoever the US President is should do what JFK did with Khruschev; suggest a joint Moon (and then possibly Mars) mission. (Khruschev was on the verge of accepting too, and I reckon the Chinese would do likewise.)

 

Combine resources, save time and place feet out there for all mankind in the truest sense, not just for empty words backed by nationalism.

  • Like 2
blabyboy

blabyboy

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Unpopular opinion:

 

Space is a global commons, should be explored as such, and before US and Chinese (or any other third party) get involved in a pissing contest, whoever the US President is should do what JFK did with Khruschev; suggest a joint Moon (and then possibly Mars) mission. (Khruschev was on the verge of accepting too, and I reckon the Chinese would do likewise.)

 

Combine resources, save time and place feet out there for all mankind in the truest sense, not just for empty words backed by nationalism.

Have you been 2010 and then 2063 again....?

leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, blabyboy said:

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

Absolutely.

 

And those who remember it often still repeat it because "hey, let's get it right this time"/arrogance/it keeps the power that they have.

Bryn

Bryn

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Ah, the US healthcare system, summed up neatly.


Pharmaceutical companies already have a preference for chronic disease management over cures.

leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Bryn said:


Pharmaceutical companies already have a preference for chronic disease management over cures.

Which goes to show that those who value material gain over life and health should be nowhere near any kind of power.

blabyboy

blabyboy

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, samlcfc said:

I'm sure they can find a way...I believe in them.

 

Doesn't cost £6k to use an MRI machine either, but they got there in the end.

I think you miss the point.. other humans of the non-US banking sector may get there, but those Next Tuesdays are like Wyrmtongue whispering in the ear of medical research to the detriment of many.

Edited by blabyboy
dsr-burnley

dsr-burnley

Posted
Posted
On 18/12/2024 at 19:09, davieG said:

I'm assuming it's true.

 

 

May be an image of 5 people, car and text

Unbelievable facts  · 

Follow

It's a strange stat.  It would only be meaningful if they told us what produced the steam.  Maybe the steam was generated by oil-fired boilers.  Coal or wood (then as now) would be a very bulky source of power.

String fellow

String fellow

Posted
Posted

This article about Nasa's Sun probe mission is interesting. The probe is 96% of the way to the Sun, having taken 6 years to get there and is travelling at close to half a million miles per hour. Apparently the Sun's surface is very much less hot than the surrounding corona and Nasa wants to know why that is, since it appears to defy the normal rules of temperature gradients with respect to distance from the heat source.

One of the best episodes of Thunderbirds in the 1960s was called 'Sun Probe', although that was a 'manned' mission, which nearly ended in disaster.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9q7lnyw25wo 

  • Like 3
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, String fellow said:

This article about Nasa's Sun probe mission is interesting. The probe is 96% of the way to the Sun, having taken 6 years to get there and is travelling at close to half a million miles per hour. Apparently the Sun's surface is very much less hot than the surrounding corona and Nasa wants to know why that is, since it appears to defy the normal rules of temperature gradients with respect to distance from the heat source.

One of the best episodes of Thunderbirds in the 1960s was called 'Sun Probe', although that was a 'manned' mission, which nearly ended in disaster.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9q7lnyw25wo 

Basic moral of that episode: International Rescue or otherwise, always have a contingency plan. Or several.

  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...