Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: D Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc,alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Off Topic-Re: GNOME bans Manjaro Core Team Member for uttering "Lunduke" Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2024 11:41:01 +0200 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: References: <0eu5ajde36dcdcipbu3eb7cllkn5t11ijd@4ax.com> <44f83bb3-dfe7-a1d9-0a1c-10677d4ad7ed@example.net> <965538a2-8ab9-666a-bd5e-03a83afc3c3a@example.net> <20240803115603.342ce8b522c4b4c8a6b8504d@eircom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="1416828"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="w/4CleFT0XZ6XfSuRJzIySLIA6ECskkHxKUAYDZM66M"; X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.advocacy:662373 comp.os.linux.misc:57663 alt.folklore.computers:226342 On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 03/08/2024 11:56, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: >> On Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:16:55 +0100 >> The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> >>> Can you DO Sums? >> >> Yes. >> >>> Can you calculate how much 'battery' is needed, and how much actually >> >> Yes done that - with a generous overhead. >> >>> exists in the real world? >> >> There's plenty of iron and chlorine easily available everywhere. If >> we wanted to build enough tanks we could hold a year's supply of >> electricity >> for the planet without impacting the availability of raw materials - but we >> only need about ten days (that's still about a competition sized swimming >> pool of tanks per 100k poeople - that's the answer I got when I did the >> sums). I'm not so sure about Vanadium but it's not in short supply. Now if >> we had to depend on Lithium for storage we'd be in trouble. >> >>> Can you calculate how many Hiroshima sized nuclear explosions the >>> energy in the battery would need to be to keep just a small country >>> going overnight? >> >> The Battery ??? You call yourself an engineer ? Reminds me of the >> time when people thought there would be *a* computer. District scale (and >> downwards) batteries make a lot more sense. >> > > So no mathematical refutation, just an ad hominem attack? > >> There are already a *lot* of batteries distributed around the >> world's power grids and there will be more as fast as they can be built >> because they make money for their owners. On top of all the grid scale >> batteries many homes now have some battery storage (usually only about a >> day's worth but larger flow batteries are appearing) which lets them buy >> cheap night rate electricity and use it in the day time or ignore an outage >> of a few hours. Some EVs and chargers support V2L and can power the house >> from the car. >> > > Yes. I calculated we have enough energy storage to keep the worlds grid up > for nearly three minutes > > You havent done the sums. You use words like 'a lot' . Yiu even think an > 'outage pf a few gpurs is acceptable' > Try telling that to a patient on a life support machine. > > >> It all adds up - but we do need to build a *lot* of batteries >> (swimming pool per 100k with current commercial offerings) before we can >> depend on intermittent sources alone, rather fewer batteries if we bring >> some nuclear into the mix but even with 100% nuclear we need enough >> batteries to handle the fast peaks and troughs. >> > > Oh dear. We need to build 'a lot' of batteries. > Or nuclear power stations. > Oh Nuclear power stations are *cheaper* than renewables plus batteries., > Whoda thunk it? > > Not you, apparently. > > Your post contains not one quantity. It is full of *qualitative* statements. > > "Yes done that - with a generous overhead." I know you havent. Because I > *have* That's simply bullshit. > > Never confuse carefully crafted bullshit with carefully calculated > engineering solutions. > Another interesting question is... _if_ as climate hysterics love to say, it is so easy to just store all the worlds electricity needs from solar and wind, in a few batteries, why haven't we done so? Surely we would no longer bother with nuclear, but just throw a few batteries here and there and the problem is solved. Or could it be that it is actually financially and physically impossible with current technology? Or is it that climate rationalists like the Philosopher and myself are somehow engaged in a conspiracy to keep this technology off the market?