EDAboard.com | EDAboard.de | EDAboard.co.uk | WTWH Media

Random fact about battery storage

Ask a question - edaboard.com

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics AUS - Random fact about battery storage

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Sylvia Else
Guest

Fri Dec 22, 2017 1:19 pm   



On 22/12/2017 10:06 PM, Phil Allison wrote:
Quote:

Stupider than Anyone Else

-------------------------



The scheme is quite small.


** No - it is just the right size to be commercially viable.

You didn't bother to read the whole article.


I did,


** But decide to ignore it and change the topic to one you prefer.

Completely wrong to post off topic in a reply.


Might be worth reading my OP to see who was off topic.

Sylvia.

~misfit~
Guest

Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:21 am   



Once upon a time on usenet Phil Allison wrote:
Quote:
~misfit~ wrote:

-----------------


It's a good thing water doesn't evaporate!



** In many places, like the east coast of Australia, the evaporation
and rainfall figures are fairly similar - about a metre or so
annually.

By your logic, no dam is worth building cos it will always be nearly
empty.


You aren't rebutting my logic, you're twisting the narrative in an attempt
to 'win'.

> Care to explain why this is not the actual case ?

Most dams are for water collection, storage and supply. The 'collection'
part means there is a source.

Anyway you've changed this into something it wasn't. My comment was in
response to your statement (which of course you snipped), reinserted below;

"** Pumped hydro storage does not rely on rainfall, cos the same water goes
up and down, over and over."

If there is no input to compensate for evaporation then it wouldn't last
long. Why would you say rainfall isn't needed then reply saying that, on the
East coast rainfall is the same as evaoration?
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

~misfit~
Guest

Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:24 am   



Once upon a time on usenet Phil Allison wrote:
Quote:
news16 wrote:

-----------------




** In many places, like the east coast of Australia, the
evaporation and rainfall figures are fairly similar - about a
metre or so annually.

By your logic, no dam is worth building cos it will always be
nearly empty.

Care to explain why this is not the actual case ?


Because all the DAMs I know of have some river feeding water into
them.


** Who asked you ???

River flow is not essential to give a dam a *catchment area* several
times its own size - making the annual increase in water level way
more than the evaporation loss. This negates the effect of even long
droughts.


So it works in the Dead Sea, the Sahra Desert, and similar places.


** It works in most places that have some rain - fuckhead.


Then why say "Pumped hydro storage does not rely on rainfall, cos the same
water goes up and down, over and over."?
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

Quote:
Long as water is not drawn off for other purposes.


In any case, pumped hydro is only economically feasible when you
continue to have surplus coal fired power stations,



** Totally stupid bollocks.

You are still smoking that vile weed I see.



.... Phil


which Australia is running out
of.





.... Phil


~misfit~
Guest

Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:48 am   



Once upon a time on usenet Phil Allison wrote:
Quote:
Sylvia Else wrote:

-----------------------

On 21/12/2017 11:56 PM, news16 wrote:
Major PV seems to sterilise the land for other uses.

That's true, but the total area required isn't that big. A solar
array 5km square would generate all the electrical power required in
Australia if the energy could be efficiently stored. There's plenty
of room in Australia, though not necessarily close to where the
power is needed (hence increased cost and power losses).

A somewhat larger array could handle the situation where the energy
was stored but with some losses.

Storage remains the problem. Pumped storage is effective, but one
needs places where a two large bodies of water can be stored, one
much higher than the other, or where the high body is sufficiently
close to the sea to use the sea itself as the low body.

There also needs to be a way of filling the lower body initially


** Can be the upper one or both.

and to handle evaporation losses.

** Not significant, rainfall covers it in motr cases even with NO
catchment for either dam.


Most cases in Australia? I call bullshit. Put out a large shallow water
storage (like a kiddies paddling pool filled to the top) 'most' places in
Australia and see if rainfall makes up for evaporation. Scale it down if you
like, try a roasting dish...
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

news16
Guest

Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:52 am   



On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 12:48:29 +1300, ~misfit~ wrote:

Quote:
Once upon a time on usenet Phil Allison wrote:


** Not significant, rainfall covers it in motr cases even with NO
catchment for either dam.

Most cases in Australia? I call bullshit. Put out a large shallow water
storage (like a kiddies paddling pool filled to the top) 'most' places
in Australia and see if rainfall makes up for evaporation. Scale it down
if you like, try a roasting dish...


Phil goofed off through all his science lessons, and probably a few
other, to miss that vital fact. He's cat cat brain because its water dish
always is full.

~misfit~
Guest

Sat Dec 23, 2017 3:14 am   



Once upon a time on usenet news16 wrote:
Quote:
On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 12:48:29 +1300, ~misfit~ wrote:

Once upon a time on usenet Phil Allison wrote:


** Not significant, rainfall covers it in motr cases even with NO
catchment for either dam.

Most cases in Australia? I call bullshit. Put out a large shallow
water storage (like a kiddies paddling pool filled to the top)
'most' places in Australia and see if rainfall makes up for
evaporation. Scale it down if you like, try a roasting dish...

Phil goofed off through all his science lessons, and probably a few
other, to miss that vital fact. He's cat cat brain because its water
dish always is full.


Yep. He posted a link about a PHES that uses seawater
http://reneweconomy.com.au/south-australia-leads-again-as-saltwater-pumped-hydro-storage-takes-shape-92608/
then went psycho on someone for not reading it properly. It says:

"Added complexity and cost related to seawater are offset by reduced civil
works (only one reservoir) and the abundant access of water, a significant
issue for power projects in arid regions."

I guess he doesn't realise that most or Australia is classified as 'arid'
(or he didn't read his own link).
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

Phil Allison
Guest

Sat Dec 23, 2017 3:21 am   



~misfit~ wrote:

----------------

Quote:


It's a good thing water doesn't evaporate!



** In many places, like the east coast of Australia, the evaporation
and rainfall figures are fairly similar - about a metre or so
annually.

By your logic, no dam is worth building cos it will always be nearly
empty.

You aren't rebutting my logic,



** You did not post logic - just a smartarse remark.


Quote:

"** Pumped hydro storage does not rely on rainfall, cos the same water goes
up and down, over and over."

If there is no input to compensate for evaporation then it wouldn't last
long.


** But there is always some rainfall and it does the job.


Quote:
Why would you say rainfall isn't needed


** But I didn't.

What I wrote was that since pumped hydro is a closed system, it is not essential to it.

Shame if that completely baffled you tiny brain.


.... Phil

Phil Allison
Guest

Sat Dec 23, 2017 3:30 am   



~misfit~ wrote:

--------------------

Quote:

** Can be the upper one or both.

and to handle evaporation losses.

** Not significant, rainfall covers it in motr cases even with NO
catchment for either dam.

Most cases in Australia? I call bullshit.



** The BOM publish maps of annual evaporation.

The rate is about 1m to 1.5m per year for all highly populated coastal areas of Australia.

http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/averagemaps.cgi?map=evap&season=0112

YOU are CRAPPING ON about a NON ISSUE - FUCKHEAD !!!



...... Phil

Phil Allison
Guest

Sat Dec 23, 2017 3:35 am   



~misfit~ wrote:

-----------------

Quote:

Yep. He posted a link about a PHES that uses seawater
http://reneweconomy.com.au/south-australia-leads-again-as-saltwater-pumped-hydro-storage-takes-shape-92608/

then went psycho on someone for not reading it properly. It says:

"Added complexity and cost related to seawater are offset by reduced civil
works (only one reservoir) and the abundant access of water, a significant
issue for power projects in arid regions."

I guess he doesn't realise that most or Australia is classified as 'arid'
(or he didn't read his own link).



** Australia is mainly ( ie low rainfall) arid but it is also entirely surrounded by sea.

Means being arid and having sea water close by are not in conflict.

Lemme tell ya something - Mr misfit.

YOU are FUCKING HALF WIT


..... Phil
..... Phil

~misfit~
Guest

Sat Dec 23, 2017 11:56 am   



Once upon a time on usenet Phil Allison wrote:
Quote:
~misfit~ wrote:

-----------------


Yep. He posted a link about a PHES that uses seawater
http://reneweconomy.com.au/south-australia-leads-again-as-saltwater-pumped-hydro-storage-takes-shape-92608/

then went psycho on someone for not reading it properly. It says:

"Added complexity and cost related to seawater are offset by reduced
civil works (only one reservoir) and the abundant access of water, a
significant issue for power projects in arid regions."

I guess he doesn't realise that most or Australia is classified as
'arid' (or he didn't read his own link).



** Australia is mainly ( ie low rainfall) arid but it is also
entirely surrounded by sea.

Means being arid and having sea water close by are not in conflict.

Lemme tell ya something - Mr misfit.

YOU are FUCKING HALF WIT


.... Phil
.... Phil


I'm not having trouble following the goal posts despite all of the snipping,
all-capitals ranting, ad hominem attacks and side-stepping.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

~misfit~
Guest

Sat Dec 23, 2017 12:05 pm   



Once upon a time on usenet Phil Allison wrote:
Quote:
~misfit~ wrote:

--------------------


** Can be the upper one or both.

and to handle evaporation losses.

** Not significant, rainfall covers it in motr cases even with NO
catchment for either dam.

Most cases in Australia? I call bullshit.



** The BOM publish maps of annual evaporation.

The rate is about 1m to 1.5m per year for all highly populated
coastal areas of Australia.

http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/averagemaps.cgi?map=evap&season=0112

YOU are CRAPPING ON about a NON ISSUE - FUCKHEAD !!!



..... Phil


Compare it to rainfall
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/averagemaps.cgi?map=rain&season=0112
and you'll see that in most centres of population in Australia there is a
net deficit - a pretty bloody big one of around 200% of rainfall. Then
consider what the article you linked earlier said about not using 'arable
land' (i.e. land with good moisture)...

So much for your repy to the question of evaporation;
"Not significant, rainfall covers it in motr cases even with NO catchment
for either dam."
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

Phil Allison
Guest

Sat Dec 23, 2017 12:31 pm   



~misfit~ wrote:

--------------------

Quote:

** Can be the upper one or both.

and to handle evaporation losses.

** Not significant, rainfall covers it in most cases even with NO
catchment for either dam.

Most cases in Australia? I call bullshit.



** The BOM publish maps of annual evaporation.

The rate is about 1m to 1.5m per year for all highly populated
coastal areas of Australia.

http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/averagemaps.cgi?map=evap&season=0112

YOU are CRAPPING ON about a NON ISSUE - FUCKHEAD !!!




Compare it to rainfall
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/averagemaps.cgi?map=rain&season=0112
and you'll see that in most centres of population in Australia there is a
net deficit - a pretty bloody big one of around 200% of rainfall.


** The maps back up just what I said.

Rest of your schizoid GABGAGE flushed where it it belongs.



..... Phil

Sylvia Else
Guest

Sun Dec 24, 2017 1:31 am   



On 23/12/2017 10:48 AM, ~misfit~ wrote:
Quote:
Once upon a time on usenet Phil Allison wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:

-----------------------

On 21/12/2017 11:56 PM, news16 wrote:
Major PV seems to sterilise the land for other uses.

That's true, but the total area required isn't that big. A solar
array 5km square would generate all the electrical power required in
Australia if the energy could be efficiently stored. There's plenty
of room in Australia, though not necessarily close to where the
power is needed (hence increased cost and power losses).

A somewhat larger array could handle the situation where the energy
was stored but with some losses.

Storage remains the problem. Pumped storage is effective, but one
needs places where a two large bodies of water can be stored, one
much higher than the other, or where the high body is sufficiently
close to the sea to use the sea itself as the low body.

There also needs to be a way of filling the lower body initially


** Can be the upper one or both.

and to handle evaporation losses.

** Not significant, rainfall covers it in motr cases even with NO
catchment for either dam.

Most cases in Australia? I call bullshit. Put out a large shallow water
storage (like a kiddies paddling pool filled to the top) 'most' places in
Australia and see if rainfall makes up for evaporation. Scale it down if you
like, try a roasting dish...


This isn't the right test. Any plausible storage reservoir will have
some catchment area. The area may not be enough to make a viable
conventional hydro system, but it can still be enough to compensate from
evaporation in the reservoir of a pumped storage system. Lakes do form,
after all.

Sylvia.

Albert van der Horst
Guest

Tue Apr 24, 2018 5:45 pm   



In article <f9mhm2Fcq3gU1_at_mid.individual.net>,
Sylvia Else <sylvia_at_not.at.this.address> wrote:
Quote:
On 17/12/2017 5:32 PM, news16 wrote:
On Sun, 17 Dec 2017 12:14:18 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 17/12/2017 12:11 PM, Phil Allison wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:

----------------------

If the entire electricity supply for Australia were based on solar
panels and lithium ion batteries, constructing those batteries would
take more than the entire world output of lithium for a year.


** Love to know some of the assumptions used in the calculation of that
claim.




.... Phil


Per-capita electricity consumption in Australia.
Population of Australia.
6 hours per day solar generation.
25 grams of lithium for 300 Wh.
World output of lithium.


Balanced by time to produce Vs ability for new sources the come online.
hint, it is only a matter of laying some extras rail;way tracks and
shipping in the mining equipment.
Sylvia.


If the entire world did this, it would account for one quarter of the
known reserves of lithium. Even with recovery of lithium from worn out
batteries (not currently economic), it doesn't seem sustainable.


Ridiculous, like the other claims. It seems that the calculation
was based on the assumption that a giant lithium battery is present
sufficient to run Australia from one load for a whole year.

Lithium is sustainable as hell. The supply in the ocean is unlimited.

Quote:

Sylvia.


Groetjes Albert
--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert_at_spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

Sylvia Else
Guest

Wed Apr 25, 2018 12:45 am   



On 25/04/2018 2:19 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote:
Quote:
In article <f9mhm2Fcq3gU1_at_mid.individual.net>,
Sylvia Else <sylvia_at_not.at.this.address> wrote:
On 17/12/2017 5:32 PM, news16 wrote:
On Sun, 17 Dec 2017 12:14:18 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 17/12/2017 12:11 PM, Phil Allison wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:

----------------------

If the entire electricity supply for Australia were based on solar
panels and lithium ion batteries, constructing those batteries would
take more than the entire world output of lithium for a year.


** Love to know some of the assumptions used in the calculation of that
claim.




.... Phil


Per-capita electricity consumption in Australia.
Population of Australia.
6 hours per day solar generation.
25 grams of lithium for 300 Wh.
World output of lithium.


Balanced by time to produce Vs ability for new sources the come online.
hint, it is only a matter of laying some extras rail;way tracks and
shipping in the mining equipment.
Sylvia.


If the entire world did this, it would account for one quarter of the
known reserves of lithium. Even with recovery of lithium from worn out
batteries (not currently economic), it doesn't seem sustainable.

Ridiculous, like the other claims. It seems that the calculation
was based on the assumption that a giant lithium battery is present
sufficient to run Australia from one load for a whole year.


It was not. I provided the basis for the calculation in response to Phil
near the top of the thread.

Quote:

Lithium is sustainable as hell. The supply in the ocean is unlimited.


Can you get it out. Have you looked at the economics?

Sylvia.

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics AUS - Random fact about battery storage

Ask a question - edaboard.com

Arabic version Bulgarian version Catalan version Czech version Danish version German version Greek version English version Spanish version Finnish version French version Hindi version Croatian version Indonesian version Italian version Hebrew version Japanese version Korean version Lithuanian version Latvian version Dutch version Norwegian version Polish version Portuguese version Romanian version Russian version Slovak version Slovenian version Serbian version Swedish version Tagalog version Ukrainian version Vietnamese version Chinese version Turkish version
EDAboard.com map