Відео

How do you usually keep the lower mile in a lake that deep from freezing?

5%

It looks like this one's partly funded by getting aggregate to sell. On the other hand having secondhand adiabatic heat to exchange from the air (as you put a km of water pressure on or off it) sounds like a loss.

Electric power batteries have plenty to offer. There are carbonate loop fuel cells, flow batteries (aqueous and not,) many battery technologies... This is a storage system too though...why would it be trouble to maintain?

What's laughable is never pricing in the externalities of fossil fuels in "every single economic model." Good luck providing those calculations in a paragraph. It's laughable that oil & gas subsidies are currently at an all time historical high. It's laughable that you assert profits FUND anything rather than being EXTRACTED by EXPLOITING resources in all their myriad forms. While it might be a necessity, at least be intellectually honest about it. Decreasing a sector's profits via shifting the mechanisms of exploitation is fair game. Besides, it's nice to see the world is moving beyond dinosaurs, both as fuel and obviously biased ideologies such as yours. It's okay, at least you're on point about nuclear power.

@@evan3710 Well you can put your money where you think its best used, I have. But don't blame the market for chasing the efficient use of capital. Buy up those cheap ESG ETF's chock full renewable power projects. At the end of the day physics = energy = economic outcomes. In the battle between physics and utopianism, physics is undefeated. This decade will demonstrate that. Renewable grid penetration in unstable beyond about 30%. And without those nat gas and coal peaker plants subsidizing and externalizing the cost of intermittency power would be $2+ per kwhr. Grid storage is a major engineering issue as you know. I'd be behind renewables if they made sense economically beyond offsetting peak demand for HVAC in warm climates. You're not heating homes in Canada via electric baseboard heating in the middle of night with renewables. It's an absurd concept, I've done the math. The point of connection across people like me and you in carbon neutral power tech is nuclear. The answer is crystal clear and we're just dragging our feet due to entrenched politics from a decade long swindle via subsidization imo. If green tech works then people would be investing heavily chasing profits... profits = excess energy.

@@Bayliss21 I don't confuse my personal beliefs/ethics with sound reasoning for trading/investing and capital HBU, especially not in futures. I never blame the market. I blame humans writ large, myself included. Capital efficiency isn't a panacea synonymous with human benefit. Putting aside the entrenched inefficiencies and misapplication of thermodynamic principles in disparate climates (which is a massive discussion all its own), I roughly agree with everything you've written save for your last two sentences, which are patently false. Energy subsidies for oil & gas have been around for a century, while renewables have enjoyed a relative pittance over the last two decades. I find it interesting you mention the latter and not the former. Last I checked, profitability and fraud aren't mutually exclusive, particularly so when pricing in those externalities. The swindles continue on, with the only differences being how they are perpetrated, who benefits or loses, and when. Don't mistake the combinations of protectionism, immature technologies, and stupidity for the absence of potential, fraudulent or not. GS just dumped $250M into Hydrostor. Unless I'm mistaken, their bets aren't borne of an ethical desire to accrue losses for the benefit of society. Lastly, there is no silver bullet, and there's no such thing as excess energy.

You need to put energy storage where the grid needs it, not where the salt domes are.

Based on the gas stove ban chat, it sounds like Louisiana could use some resilience for the grid there. (To hurricanes.)

ua-cam.com/video/GicQwXbNnv0/v-deo.html

Hell no, that's fish estuary space. But maybe it's also seawall space and not the worst idea if you have it planned to not foul unmanagably.

ua-cam.com/video/bPF_bvh8mKw/v-deo.html

Yeah, good idea that's not too incompatible. Air just pipes with fewer losses than water through blind borehole.

Bottling up your emotions doesnt count

Do you really?

Chad georesevoir inflation labor has joined the chat.

I was curious about this also, for such s big scale. I'm not an engineer, but a pipe-fitter. I've built several very small scale systems where water and air were kept from mixing by installing traps in the piping. So instead of just straight piping connecting the underground air reservoir to the water above, it was "trapped" with a section of pipe running up from the air, then over horizontally an arbitraty distance, then back down an engineered distance, before returning vertically up to the water. I have no idea if a similar principle works on this scale or not, or if mechanical seals are used instead. Just tossing out the idea.

Imagine you've weighed down a bucket full of air at the bottom of a pool. The air is trapped between the waterline and the top of the bucket/cavern. It cannot escape down and out the side to "bubble up" to the surface. No seal is needed, the water's path to the surface just has to be below the cavern's water-air interface. Now imagine you've attached an air tube to the top of the bucket extending to the surface of the pool. Unless you seal it off with your thumb, the air will shoot out, because the bucket's air is compressed to a pressure of Delta_P = density of water * gravitational acceleration * depth. Filling it with ambient air now requires a compressor (e.g. your lungs), and releasing it can provide power. Pretty simple.