When you go to turn on your solar panels and wind turbine in Texas in February.
(media.patriots.win)
Comments (81)
sorted by:
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES
•
All
General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
But aren't such solutions currently still very expensive and/or immature and/or have other issues? If there are improvements in such technologies, I believe wind and solar would become much more viable, and I do very much believe that energy storage is an excellent target for more research funding, but as far as I know, it is still at least a ways off.
Geothermal also sounds interesting, though if it is viable, efficient, robust, etc., and how far off it is, I don't know.
Flow batteries are already starting to enter the marketplace. They can be made of inexpensive materials because they don't need to be light and compact like car batteries. There are literally hundreds of startup companies all over the world working the tech.
One recent report from business intelligence firm IDTechEx, cited by Energy Storage News, noted there was about 70 MW/250 MWh in redox flow battery storage capacity deployed to date, all in medium to large-scale projects. Deployments, however, are set to increase thanks to the batteries' fast response time, scalability, and not least, their much easier recyclability than lithium-ion batteries.
Gates, Bezos bet on flow battery technology
..........
Why are you not using archive.is or similar when linking to MSM articles?...
And "starting to enter"... they do sound interesting, but would their costs and their energy density and efficiency be sufficient reg. large-scale energy storage reg. general infrastructure and storing energy from solar/wind? I haven't looked into it, but I would definitely welcome advances. Though one must be careful reg. looking into things and considering them.
Sorry about the links. should start using archive. it's a little more work.
The fact that the sun and the moon deliver inexhaustible power for free make such energy sources very attractive, inevitable. Technology is advancing exponentially; tech singularity due in 35 yrs or so. People won't be burning fossils for long. Many companies are working on mini fusion reactors now, with some predicting 5 year timeline, for example.
New technologies always have their pessimists.
"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Thomas Watson, president of IBM, 1943.
"Television won't be able to hold on to any market it captures after the first six months. People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night." Darryl Zanuck, executive at 20th Century Fox, 1946
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." Ken Olsen, founder of Digital Equipment Corporation, 1977
What the heck are you even writing about? Are you copy-pasting from a script? (and given that fossil fuels came from dead material, which again were ultimately nourished by the sun reg. photosynthesis, how would it not fit in that category?.......).
Why did you edit your comment more than an hour after you made it?
Will you edit your previous comment to use archive links instead of what they are now?