The "battery" in essence would be the reservoir. Makes sense to me.
Its called pumped storage and it is only storage mechanism that can theoretically provide the quantity of power that we need. The trouble is it is geographically limited and lots of places which don't already have access to hydro power will still need natural gas and nuclear base load.
MIT study looks at the limitations of batteries and why people pushing for solar/wind are clueless:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611683/the-25-trillion-reason-we-cant-rely-on-batteries-to-clean-up-the-grid/Ferrara’s modeling has found that such a battery could make it possible for renewables to provide 90 percent of electricity needs for most grids, for just marginally higher costs than today’s.
But it’s dangerous to bank on those kinds of battery breakthroughs—and even if Form Energy or some other company does pull it off, costs would still rise exponentially beyond the 90 percent threshold, Ferrara says.
“The risk,” Jenkins says, “is we drive up the cost of deep decarbonization in the power sector to the point where the public decides it’s simply unaffordable to continue toward zero carbon.”
Fortunately, there is a technically and economically viable solution: nuclear power. But the green zealots would rather see society driven back to the dark ages than accept a source of power they don't like.
Home
Contact
Login
Register