• wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I feel like we’re missing the part about “push carts up a hill”, which involves virtually no serious engineering difficulties aside from “which hill” and “let’s make sure the tracks run smoothly”. See: the ARES project in Nevada

    • iii@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      Yeah, that’s 50MW, storing power for 15 minutes, so 20MWh. (1).

      There’s also a similar company: gravicity.

      They’re a fun academic endeavour. But if gravity provides the potential, water beats them per dollar spend. It’s not even close.

      So do regular batteries.

      • wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        17 hours ago

        A fair point, but given how the best places to build solar infrastructure tend to not have easily accessible large volumes of water, I should think that economies of scale can apply if we were to put actual investment into scaling up the gravitational potential. Sure, it’s not a geometric law like for kinetic energy, but greater height and greater mass are both trivial quantities to scale in places with large empty areas. I’m simply pointing out that we’ve never invested in that obvious possibility as a civilization. Am I missing something obvious that makes the scaling non-viable?

        • iii@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Transportation of electrical power is quite efficient. I think that colocation of generation amd storage are economically rarely a technical necessity.

          I can see it work in terms of national security, but then again, regular li-ion have better economics.

          The biggest problem with gravitational potential is P=mgh, that is, potential energy only grows linearly in mass and height.

          • wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            17 hours ago

            I agree with you on the linearity issue. I just feel like using its size as a criticism is invalid, given that the very source you cited pointed out that the reason it’s so small is because they chose to reuse an already-disturbed site, rather than building it on 100 acres of BLM land, which I’d argue is quite admirable. The colocation point is also fair, though our water resources in the entire american west are severely limited, and will become moreso over the next 50 years. Utah’s declining snowpack and the overdrawn Colorado can only cover so much. I feel like, while the GPE law is linear for both mass and height, the fact that we can scale both is a point in favor of both pumped hydro and rail storage, and rail storage can be stored virtually indefinitely, as long as it doesn’t have time to rust in place. Being able to supplement the off-hours is absolutely doable with rail.

            • iii@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              16 hours ago

              In practice, you’re usually using existing geography (historical or geographical) for height. So you’re left with scaling m.

              I honestly also hoped it would be a great idea. I donated to gravicity back in the day. You live and learn.

              • wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                16 hours ago

                Again, a fair point. Assuming that anyone with an idea of the meaning of “potential energy” survives the next ten years, I’d still like to see it more fully explored in the american west, but it is, unfortunately, rather a moot point for at least five years.

                • iii@mander.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  16 hours ago

                  Ah that’s politics.

                  I’m fine with talking polite politics. So far you seem to me like a polite and educated person.

                  My point of view is from EU, not US. To me US always looked like higher highs, and lower lows, in terms to a person’s achievements.

                  To me, EU always seemed like: wear the uniform, don’t stand out. No new ideas please.

                  I envy living in US.

                  • wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    12 hours ago

                    That’s interesting. For me, I guess it’s a “grass is greener” scenario. I look at the headway various countries in the eurozone have made on topics from socialized medicine, to universal basic income, to free postsecondary education, to the protection of personal data, and even to forcing Apple to change its charging cable to the standard USB-C. That change of policy forced them to change it here, as well. The EU’s stodginess helps people even beyond its borders. My students ALL have iPhones, and It’s unbelievable to witness the ease with which they can access their devices now, vs. when they were all forced to use a specialized cable for connection and charge. America hasn’t even figured out high-speed rail yet. As an american who teaches secondary science to a bunch of naturalized citizens under the age of 18, I don’t think I can stay through the next 4 years. I fear the pogroms, if not for myself, then for my students and their families. I can’t have my tax dollars go towards a repeat of the mistakes of 90 years ago. I’m thinking New Zealand is looking comparatively nice (though apparently there’s a growing nationalist movement there as well).

                    In general, I do sense that there is a significantly greater sense of “rugged individualism” in the US, compared to many other countries, but I see the costs of that individualism more acutely because of its proximity. People seem to be largely incapable of consideration here, from anti-vaxx and anti-mask movements to the hesitance to tax the wealthiest individuals due to the thought that “maybe that’ll be me one day”. It’s really quite distressing.