• faintwhenfree@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        a year ago

        They are, and they are good solution but they are not good all and end all solutions, both wind and solar cannot meet baseload and when you start talking about battery storage as solution, scaling it up requires more metal mining than will ever be sustainable, so pursuit of fusion, pursuit of tidal energy, pursuit of better nuclear, pursuit of better geothermal are viable exploration options as we need baseload generation substitute.

          • faintwhenfree@lemmus.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            a year ago

            Dams are a whole another story ecologically but even leaving that aside, we are talking 200-300GW capacity currently in the world for PHES, even if you construct damns on every possible lakes, estimates are around 1000GW that world can build. World currently consumes close to 8000GW on baseload. We won’t even cover 15% of baseload with PHES.

            If you’re trolling with your storage as magical solution keep trolling.

              • faintwhenfree@lemmus.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                a year ago

                I’m not saying storing potential energy doesn’t work, it works and even though we lose some energy in conversion it’s still better than chemical batteries. No question there, my point is simple, we don’t have enough infrastructure to cover the world’s baseload demand by releasing stored energy. We need something that can produce baseload power 24x7. Geothermal and tidal(debatable but close enough) are the only viable renewable energy sources we have that run 24x7 and they’re not enough to cover the world’s energy demands. Adding PSEH doesn’t cover it either. We need something more and nuclear (fission or fusion) are the only other options that don’t emit CO2.

          • El Barto@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            a year ago

            Because a technology community is usually filled with people interested in advancements in technology.

            So, say, you’re interested in space telescopes, come to this community to read about the latest advancements and you’re hit with someone saying “pffftt, stick to ground telescopes, people!”

            (I didn’t downvote you, by the way.)