this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
971 points (86.3% liked)

Science Memes

11437 readers
1205 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 month ago (4 children)

If the demand goes up I have some doubt, also, mining for Lithium is far from being clean, and then batteries are becoming wastes, so I doubt you would replace nuclear power with this solution

I guess in some regions it could work, but you're still depending on the weather

[–] Ooops@feddit.org 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

You don't need lithium. That's just the story told to have an argument why renewables are allegedly bad for the environment.

Lithium is fine for handhelds or cars (everywhere where you need the maximum energy density). Grid level storage however doesn't care if the building houising the batteries weighs 15% more. On the contrary there are a lot of other battery materials better suited because lithium batteries also come with a lot of drawback (heat and quicker degradation being the main ones here).

PS: And the materials can also be recycled. Funnily there's always the pro-nuclear argument coming up then you can recycle waste to create new fuel rod (although it's never actually done), yet with battery tech the exact same argument is then ignored.

[–] iii@mander.xyz 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Density doesn't matter much when it comes to grid scale, indeed.

What battery technologies are you thinking of? Zinc-ion? Flow batteries?

[–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They're currently bringing sodium batteries to market (as in "the first vendor is selling them right now"). They're bulky but fairly robust IIRC and they don't need lithium.

[–] scholar@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

If you're thinking of the portable battery marketed as 'solid state' then that was a scam - a teardown revealed it was just lithium cells

[–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Nah, I'm thinking of sodium-ion batteries. That's 1990s tech and is currently in use for grid storage. Several manufacturers are currently bringing car-ready Na-ion batteries to market and there seems to be one production car using them in China (a version of the JMEV EV3, which I hav enever heard about before).

Now, Na-ion is still less mature than Li-ion and that Chinese car gets about 17% less range compared do the Li-ion version.

[–] ceiphas@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

you know that grid storage does not always mean "a huge battery", you can also just pump water in a higher basin oder push carts up a hill and release the potential energy when you need it...

[–] iii@mander.xyz 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Pumped storage is a thing yeah. But might just as well go full hydro, if you're doing the engineering anyways.

[–] wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

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 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

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 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

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 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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.

[–] iii@mander.xyz 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

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

I think the socialized medicine and socialized postsecondary education are the biggest advantages indeed.

This comes at the cost of way lower wages, and smaller wage diffrrences. An educated engineer's take home pay is maybe 1.2 times that of a factory worker. Resulting in very little people actually persuing STEM.

Combine that with the deindustrialization that's going on in the EU, as it can't compete with Asia, we will have to see how long it lasts. Lots of uneducated (even as education costs are socialized, most don't persue it) are already without a job, and the number keeps growing.

It's a trade-off, on which I can understand your point of view, as to how it benefits individuals in the short and mid-long term.

Universal basic income does, to my knowledge, not exist in the EU.

from anti-vaxx and anti-mask movements

Those were/are popular here, too.

There's likely a "grass is greener" going on, for the both of us, indeed :)

I mainly look at the lack of innovation happening in EU. Missed the whole of tech, machine learning, no innovative industry, no fintech, little to no biotech as GMOs are outlawed. Only farma is doing well. It's a terrible restrictive place if you've an inquisitive mind.

[–] bassomitron@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yeah, lithium mining and processing is extremely toxic and destructive to the environment. On one hand, it's primarily limited to a smaller area, but on the other hand, is it sustainable long-term unless a highly efficient lithium recycling technology emerges? And yes, I know there are some startups that are trying to solve the recycling problem, some that are promising.