this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2024
112 points (84.6% liked)

Green Energy

2110 readers
39 users here now

everything about energy production

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'll note that right now, this is a seasonal issue, associated with moderate springtime temperatures when there is a lot of sunshine available.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dagamant@lemmy.world 36 points 4 months ago (6 children)

This is only a problem because of money. Maybe California should install some power storage centers in order to hold the excess for later.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 14 points 4 months ago

There's already some storage: its the #1 source of electricity during the evening peak, but realistically, we're going to want enough renewables that we sometimes see curtailment

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago

Way ahead of you. This article is like propaganda against solar panels.

[–] qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I'm hoping to one day install some solar, and looking forward to setting up non-battery "storage"


e.g., electric water heater that turns on when there's an excess of power, deep freezer that gets as cold as possible when there's excess power, that sort of thing. It seems thermodynamics is the relevant discipline for these sorts of "storage" methods :)

As an aside


while smart devices are much maligned, some rudimentary smart features for matching consumption seems like a pretty good idea. (If I ever get around to this stuff it'll be local control via HomeAssistant.)

[–] Dagamant@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Im a fan of gravity based energy storage. Excess energy is used to raise a weight up a slope and it can be reclaimed when the weight is released.

[–] BastingChemina@slrpnk.net 4 points 4 months ago

There is a reason why energy based energy storage is not more developed right now (with the exception of Pumped-storage hydroelectricity). It's not very dense at all.

A 15 tons block of concrete that goes up 100m can only store 4kwh of energy. A 4.5kwh battery cost around 1600€.

Gravity based energy storage seem simple and elegant at first but you go into the details you realized that is far far les efficient than regular chemical battery. Unfortunately.

[–] qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website 1 points 4 months ago

Absolutely! Living in a city, this gets a bit tricky though. But if I had a giant reservoir on a hill...and another one below it...

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Why would you convert electricity into thermal work then back again? Why not consider old school batteries? You're already taking up space and infrastructure

[–] qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Oh, I have no intention of converting that back to electricity. The goal would essentially be to maximize usage during times of cheap/marginally free energy.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago

Ah, that makes sense.

[–] Wanderer@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago

The only problem is they need more of it. Some cost needs to be put onto solar to fix the grid. It needs upgrading because solar is making more work for the grid.

Solar is absoultely good, but it doesn't come without costs to the grid and that money needs to be raised to upgrade it.

[–] spujb@lemmy.cafe 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

if you had read the article, you’d know that they are.

To cope, CAISO is selling some excess power to nearby states; California is also planning to install additional storage and batteries to hold solar power until later in the afternoon.

don’t just read the headlines y’all. not a good look.

[–] Dagamant@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, sorry I missed that single sentence in the article that is so plastered with ads that my phone has trouble displaying the page. I’ll be sure to do better next time.

[–] spujb@lemmy.cafe 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

lmao “too much work to read”

~~upvoted~~

[–] Dagamant@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The site is serious crap on mobile. Between all the poppins and the ads reloading to make it jump around as you read. It’s damn hard to read a full article on a lot of these news sites.

[–] spujb@lemmy.cafe -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

cool. still not really an excuse to make an uninformed comment. get an ad blocker or a browser with a reader mode before spreading misinformation like that lol.

[–] Dagamant@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I mean, it’s a pretty good excuse. The sites job is to inform people and they do a shit job of it. I’m literally checking lemmy on my phone while taking a break so when some link leads to a site that’s damn near unreadable I’m not spending my entire break futzing with settings to make it readable. Like I said, I’ll do better next time.

[–] spujb@lemmy.cafe 1 points 4 months ago

oops sorry i read “i’ll do better next time” as sarcasm at first. that’s on me, totally my fault.

idk what app you use but Voyager has a setting that lets me open all links in reader mode. i believe other apps i have tried also have this option. and adblock plus works great 👍