Reply To: would nuclear energy really be accessible to all?

[Brian H]

Wombat wrote:

Well excess power could go into storage for later use.

Same problem as solar and wind…

Except that the total cost of the electricity is quite a bit lower.

Would it make sense to have a couple of large central stations that would grab the excess off the grid and use electrolysis to create hydrogen?

Or go further and create Methane?

I live in Canberra, close to a massive hydroelectric system called Snowy Hydro (http://www.snowyhydro.com.au/). So fortunately any excess power generated in my area can simply pump water from the lower lakes to the higher lakes, and at peak times the water can be released back down through the generators for almost-instant extra power. My region’s power storage needs are already in place 🙂

And what do you pay per kwh for the existence of that infrastructure?

I keep trying to remind people of the pointlessness of installing or preserving gear and facilities etc. which will ultimately (i.e., once production capacity for FF generators ramps up to satisfy demand with reasonable delivery times (a few months?)) be undercut significantly by cheap direct power from FF sourcing. For load-matching, as long as there is enough to meet peak demands, pausing individual generators in the major clusters, (which could amount to ‘000s of machines to produce multi-gigawatts for urban or industrial centers, etc.) would be more than “fine” enough control.

And, Wombat, do you really think your water storage cycle at Canberra costs can compete with ¼-½¢/kwh?

In the end, you’ll probably end up dynamiting Snowy and letting the fish swim free again. :cheese: