← Back to context

Comment by b00ty4breakfast

8 hours ago

We've already got pumped-hydro storage infrastructure and battery tech, while certainly not as far along as the boosters circa the middle of the last decade promised us, is at a point where it's viable as one part of the puzzle.

Speaking of the larger picture, this is to say nothing of all the other renewable options out there that continue to work when the sun goes down.

EDIT: And it doesn't speak at all to the other "alternative" energy storage options like thermal storage

Solar has progressed so fast that only the most insanely optimistic predictions were accurate in the end.

I'd guess batteries are also at that stage.

Googling it seems that is correct eg:

> In 2017, U.S. grid storage developers promised they could deliver 35 gigawatts by 2025. They beat their target and made batteries a key power-sector player.

> That goal sounded improbable even to some who believed that storage was on a growth trajectory. A smattering of independent developers and utilities had managed to install just 500 megawatts of batteries nationwide, equivalent to one good-size gas-fired power plant. Building 35 gigawatts would entail 70-fold growth in just eight years.

https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/energy-storage/grid-sto...

The last ~4% or so when the sun isnt shining, the wind isnt blowing, the batteries and pumped storage are depleted can be supplied via power2gas.

Unlike pumped storage and batteries, Power2gas has poor round trip efficiency (40%) but unlike them gas is a very cost effective way to store large amounts of energy for long periods of time.

The ironic thing is that even if we produced all our power in this inefficient way and not just 4% it would still be a bit cheaper than nuclear power.

Until natural gas extraction is taxed or banned, though, power2gas probably wont be cost effective. Natural gas is too cheap even with all the wars.