this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2024
135 points (97.9% liked)

Futurology

1669 readers
179 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Well if that's actually the functioning case, they are investing their effort in the wrong place. They don't need energy production, they need storage.

As far as your comment amount solar, we do have solutions that exist. Energy companies just need to actually get off their asses and work them into the grids.

[–] Dimantina@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Yeah storage is sadly difficult and time consuming. I mean if we aren't just using a crap ton of lith-ION.

[–] Specal@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Sodium ion batteries are just about ready for mass production, they take up twice the amount of space as lithium but are just as effective and far cheaper

[–] EveryoneDiesAlone@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

What is your source on that? I heard some news about china making some breakthroughs on sodium ion batteries but I am waiting for independent confirmation on that because, well china has let us down more often than not with “bleeding edge” tech.

I was thinking molten salt would be a better energy sink for the here and now.

[–] Luvs2Spuj@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Hydrogen gets shit on loads, but this is exactly the kind of thing it can do pretty well. When you have excess, you don't need to have to worry about efficiency in the same way. Then it's ready to go once needed.

[–] EveryoneDiesAlone@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

What do you mean by hydrogen?

Hydrogen production through electrolysis? Or something else?

[–] sudo42@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Nuclear Power Industry: "We need to invest $10B in nuclear plants!"
Everyone else: "Why not just spend $1B on battery storage instead?"
Nuclear Power Industry: "Nah, that's not feasible."

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 1 points 2 months ago

While a certain amount of pumped hydro energy storage is feasible, we will never have enough storage to

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

Who would "they" be in that case? The people who'd like cheap energy do indeed need storage. The nuclear lobbies on the other hand need to cripple their competition, so they only need their own, already present facilities and whatever means they can get to sabotage upcoming competition and secure their primary position.

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

The French? Read the article or the comments I was responding to. 🫰

[–] beebarfbadger@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

"The French"? The homogenous singular entity that all have one singular set of goals and no differences whatsoever? Or the Frrench people who'd like cheap energy or maybe the French electricity lobbyists? It's not that simple.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The people who live in France who are having this issue with power, as explained in the article and in the comments.

Seems you're bored and just attempting to inflame people into discussing how my comment was in no way reductive or trying to represent people in a way they didn't wish to be. Go touch grass.

[–] beebarfbadger@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Oh no. Now I've angered the humans.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Apparently, just yourself. Nobody is angry.

[–] beebarfbadger@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Earth's mammals seemed to be pretty upset that I suggested the existence of multiple groups with multiple priorities within the French.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] beebarfbadger@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

I don't dare to. The entirety of life in the universe seems to be cross with me.