Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Predictably, they seem to have failed to take this unavoidable reality into account.
And all the "portfolio-watching" one might do ain't gonna change the fact that 1) these batteries don't actually exist yet, at least, not in the form that will be needed for this task, and 2) if you want a reliable energy source (not a mere energy carrier, such as a battery) to charge these other batteries that don't actually exist yet, you'll be relying on natural gas or some similar boiler fuel.
Sheesh..I was going to offer a lengthy technical tome on a few of the reasons I don't think this will work very well..... But the load was to great on my battery system and I tripped off the line......................
Lol..of course, as I'm sure you got from reading the article..err..you did did the article, right?---It is working..well...to the tune of approaching 50% of California's electric load..at peak demand. If you do not grasp the significance of this..not much I can say.
Last edited by EvilEyeFleegle; 01-15-2018 at 11:10 AM..
I fully support the continued research into alternative energy sources. Things like this are easy to see through. Batteries have to be recharged. We are nowhere close to solar conversion of this kind yet. We are doing better all the time and there is nothing wrong with someone pushing us away from old technologies but to recharge batteries takes N.G. electric generation.
N.G. combined with batteries is cleaner than many of the old ways and in that, it is good.
You read the article..right? Not just knee-jerking and repeating the same tired mantra, are you?
Because this article clearly addresses what you are saying..."Batteries need to be recharged" So? As stated in the article..renewables are doing just that...the point of batteries..is that they can store power...duh....and serve the community at times of peak demand. The point of the article is that they have been doing this so well..that traditional power generating plants are being forced off-line due to financial considerations..no need to have a natural gas power plant standing by..when one has sufficient power stored to cover peak load.
Didn't Edison try this and got his butt kicked by Tesla. Batteries can only store DC and DC is very poor at transmitting energy at great distance. So they are going to have to convert all the battery energy into AC which will require massive DC-AC inverters. The battery banks required to supply this amount energy are going to be huge and pose an environmental risk, plus they will have a life span of around 5 years.
Predictably, they seem to have failed to take this unavoidable reality into account.
And all the "portfolio-watching" one might do ain't gonna change the fact that 1) these batteries don't actually exist yet, at least, not in the form that will be needed for this task, and 2) if you want a reliable energy source (not a mere energy carrier, such as a battery) to charge these other batteries that don't actually exist yet, you'll be relying on natural gas or some similar boiler fuel.
Sorry..with all due respect..are you drunk? Did you even read the article? I thinbk not..or you would have not posted this silliness.
1) The batteries DO exist..as this is the entire thrust of the article.
2) They are being charged by renewable energy sources..most notably the sun..again..as noted in the article.
3) Again, as noted in the article...over 50% of California's peak energy load...is being handled by these "batteries that don't exist"..lol.
Apparently the only predictable 'unavoidable reality' that I can see..is that people will comment..without actually reading the link in question.
Didn't Edison try this and got his butt kicked by Tesla. Batteries can only store DC and DC is very poor at transmitting energy at great distance. So they are going to have to convert all the battery energy into AC which will require massive DC-AC inverters. The battery banks required to supply this amount energy are going to be huge and pose an environmental risk, plus they will have a life span of around 5 years.
Read article?
I would also point out..that we have come a fair distance since the days of Edison and Tesla..and might have learned a few new tricks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We need more tents. 
