Select to expand quoteMacroscien said..Paradox said..stehsegler said..
I'd suggest those scientists should do some reading and get up to speed on local mobility as well as the energy economy. In a nutshell coal and oil are going to play a very small role by 2045 when it comes to energy production. Gas might have a slightly larger role but that remains to be seen. The vast majority of energy will be created using renewables. I believe storage will happen mostly through Hydrogen and less via batteries. Vehicles will be EVs and energy probably stored via batteries but new tech might change.
I hear this view a lot, but I just cannot see it happening. Simply because there is no technology available to achieve it, nor is there anything actually good about wind and solar apart from idiological satisfaction. They are step backward in energy production in almost every aspect. Any sort of large shift certainly isn't happening yet apart from a small shift from coal to gas, despite the trillions being dumped into it. Global use of fossil fuel continues to rise and rise simply because it is available, cheap and is by far the most efficient way to generate power.
We can get wind and solar maybe to 50% share at great cost in both monetary and power reliability terms. Germany is a great example of that. After that we need coal/gas/nuclear. Probably all 3.
Everyone pushing an all renewable future seems to be ignoring the experts and real world examples that say it can't be done. Most are heavily invested in the outcome and don't seem to care about the massive real cost and drop in standard of living it will push on all society, especially the poor.
The only possible exception to that if we follow through with a rapid uptake in nuclear energy. There has been a massive resurgance in nuclear power but it takes time, and we have ingnored that technology at great expense.
Hydrogen is not going to happen. It is highly inefficent as an energy storage and incredibly difficult to handle and transport. Natural gas beats it hands down in every single aspect. My view is that by 2045 renewable generation in wealthy countries will have peaked at 30% and dropped back to 20% due to the slow realisation of the cost and uselesseness of thier intermittant low density energy. Nuclear will have surged to 40% of all power generation and gas and coal make up the rest. Hydrogen will be in exactly the same spot it is now and has been since it was first considered 100 years ago, in the "development" stage sucking up tax research dollars.
All wrong. Flow battery are going to replace nowadays expensive lithium battery for stationery storage.
Based on cheap Sodium, sulfur and iron and aluminium.
By the year 2050 we could have 100% renewable energy. One more thing. We need to start building transmission line spaning the globe. The is always wind and sun somewhere.
My stationery is stored near my desk... but apart from that I think I agree with Macro.
I can imagine a battery system where you pump two fluids into your car and extract the used solutions. You get electric cars but there is no recharge time, just a regular reload like now at petrol stations.
If its not as efficient as li-ion, does it matter?
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..
My stationery is stored near my desk... but apart from that I think I agree with Macro.
I can imagine a battery system where you pump two fluids into your car and extract the used solutions. You get electric cars but there is no recharge time, just a regular reload like now at petrol stations.
If its not as efficient as li-ion, does it matter?
Thats the problem overall. People can imagine all sorts of things, but the actual implementation of an idea is where it all falls down.
None of these ideas are even close to being realistically workable in the real world on a scale of what is needed. If it is workable and even remotely cost effective it would already be a reality.
Select to expand quoteParadox said..FormulaNova said..
My stationery is stored near my desk... but apart from that I think I agree with Macro.
I can imagine a battery system where you pump two fluids into your car and extract the used solutions. You get electric cars but there is no recharge time, just a regular reload like now at petrol stations.
If its not as efficient as li-ion, does it matter?
Thats the problem overall. People can imagine all sorts of things, but the actual implementation of an idea is where it all falls down.
None of these ideas are even close to being realistically workable in the real world on a scale of what is needed. If it is workable and even remotely cost effective it would already be a reality.
Well, that's the good thing about technology. People tend to invent things or develop ideas and things move on. I agree, ideas are one thing, but implementing them is another, but things do change.
I had a discussion with a sibling at a family dinner recently where they assured me that we will move to electric cars very soon and that we have to have 100% renewables in the next few years. My opinion is that we don't have enough to cover base-load and no decent storage options outside of peak generation periods, but there is no use arguing with people about it unless they have also looked at it, which they don't seem to have done. People claim that 'oh batteries will fix that' without having looked at what the batteries cost and the economics of deploying enough of them.
I even laugh when people talk about their e;lectric cars being batteries for the grid. Are they cars or batteries? Are you going to modify your driving behavior because the grid needs the energy more than your car does? are you going to only go 30kms in case the grid needs your stored power overnight? But then how many of these people really think these things through?
And just imagine how and what are Ford thinking making their best seller, the f150, I think an all electric, no hybrid, no gas alternative. WTF
Select to expand quoteMacroscien said..
All wrong. Flow battery are going to replace nowadays expensive lithium battery for stationery storage.
Based on cheap Sodium, sulfur and iron and aluminium.
About 5 years ago on these very forums somebody else proclaimed that bromine based batteries were "the thing" and that coal was now dead because bromine was coming.
What has happened since then is the rate at which coal gets dug up and burnt has increased and the number of bromine based batteries in use is..... zero. That person was so wrong, so often, they seem to have just vanished without so much as an adieu.
Problem I have with "batteries" is that they have been around for 100+ years but the efficiency hasn't really improved that much. If you project that rate of improvement forward it doesn't get to where people say it will be.
It seems the idea of a metallic anode and cathode and electrolyte in between just isn't getting us to far too quick.
You can proclaim lithium or sodium or bromine will be better than copper or lead or iron, and that the next great element to try is just around the corner - and I am sure it is, but different elements doing the same thing just doesn't seem to be delivering the revolution people have been proclaiming for several generations now.
The whole discussion about generation seems pretty irrelevant to me. We can generate power relatively easily using many, many methods.
But until we can sort out how we store, distribute and use that energy nobody is getting out of the circle we seem stuck in.
- and contrary to Macro I'm guessing the answer is local (generation, storage and use), not global distribution via thousands of kms of very expensive, very vulnerable, very lowly efficient giant extension leads.
Only a few posts ago Macro was complaining that no nuclear power plants are designed against 'terrorist threats', now he wants the entire humankind to be dependent on giant global power cables. How you gonna protect them from the same "terrorist threats" ??
Select to expand quoteCarantoc said..Macroscien said..
All wrong. Flow battery are going to replace nowadays expensive lithium battery for stationery storage.
Based on cheap Sodium, sulfur and iron and aluminium.
About 5 years ago on these very forums somebody else proclaimed that bromine based batteries were "the thing" and that coal was now dead because bromine was coming.
What has happened since then is the rate at which coal gets dug up and burnt has increased and the number of bromine based batteries in use is..... zero. That person was so wrong, so often, they seem to have just vanished without so much as an adieu.
Problem I have with "batteries" is that they have been around for 100+ years but the efficiency hasn't really improved that much. If you project that rate of improvement forward it doesn't get to where people say it will be.
It seems the idea of a metallic anode and cathode and electrolyte in between just isn't getting us to far too quick.
You can proclaim lithium or sodium or bromine will be better than copper or lead or iron, and that the next great element to try is just around the corner - and I am sure it is, but different elements doing the same thing just doesn't seem to be delivering the revolution people have been proclaiming for several generations now.
The whole discussion about generation seems pretty irrelevant to me. We can generate power relatively easily using many, many methods.
But until we can sort out how we store, distribute and use that energy nobody is getting out of the circle we seem stuck in.
- and contrary to Macro I'm guessing the answer is local (generation, storage and use), not global distribution via thousands of kms of very expensive, very vulnerable, very lowly efficient giant extension leads.
Only a few posts ago Macro was complaining that no nuclear power plants are designed against 'terrorist threats', now he wants the entire humankind to be dependent on giant global power cables. How you gonna protect them from the same "terrorist threats" ??
You're assuming an intelligence level that simply isn't there. 
Select to expand quoteCarantoc said..Macroscien said..
All wrong. Flow battery are going to replace nowadays expensive lithium battery for stationery storage.
Based on cheap Sodium, sulfur and iron and aluminium.
About 5 years ago on these very forums somebody else proclaimed that bromine based batteries were "the thing" and that coal was now dead because bromine was coming.
What has happened since then is the rate at which coal gets dug up and burnt has increased and the number of bromine based batteries in use is..... zero.
Lots of Bromide Batteries are going into telecommunication towers as UPS as they're cheaper and performing better than lead and lithium. They are a better choice for housing. Most of the sales are OS as Oz is just a small market with no interest in batteries
It's going to take a lot of lithium to electrify our current vehicles. Vehicles evolved to their current level of extravagance in an environment of cheap fossil-derived energy. They almost build themselves. Hence they're cheap to buy and cheap to run. The top selling vehicle is a Toyota Hi Lux. 2.1 tonnes. 2.3 tonnes when you do the ubiquitous ARB fitout.
But if you can afford it why not? A few are are loaded up with tradies tools but take a look when you're on the road. Most are buzzing about town with just one 90 kg body and maybe at most a laptop, a tennis racket or surfboard. It'll take an 800 kg lithium battery to power this thing but the job could be done with a 5 kg battery in an ebike. We need to change the game.
Here's the latest Nissan Navara PRO-4X $59,790 drive away - Who do you think they are aiming to sell this to? Can't blame them. If they can sell it they'll build it.
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652621001037
I thought 150k was a bit low for the life of a car in this study since my last one had 450k on it until written off.
Considering that it looks even better for the ICE v Ev since the longevity of batteries wouldn't be the 20 yrs plus that a good combustion engine will last.
Select to expand quoteCarantoc said..Macroscien said..
All wrong. Flow battery are going to replace nowadays expensive lithium battery for stationery storage.
Based on cheap Sodium, sulfur and iron and aluminium.
About 5 years ago on these very forums somebody else proclaimed that bromine based batteries were "the thing" and that coal was now dead because bromine was coming.
What has happened since then is the rate at which coal gets dug up and burnt has increased and the number of bromine based batteries in use is..... zero. That person was so wrong, so often, they seem to have just vanished without so much as an adieu.
Problem I have with "batteries" is that they have been around for 100+ years but the efficiency hasn't really improved that much. If you project that rate of improvement forward it doesn't get to where people say it will be.
It seems the idea of a metallic anode and cathode and electrolyte in between just isn't getting us to far too quick.
You can proclaim lithium or sodium or bromine will be better than copper or lead or iron, and that the next great element to try is just around the corner - and I am sure it is, but different elements doing the same thing just doesn't seem to be delivering the revolution people have been proclaiming for several generations now.
The whole discussion about generation seems pretty irrelevant to me. We can generate power relatively easily using many, many methods.
But until we can sort out how we store, distribute and use that energy nobody is getting out of the circle we seem stuck in.
- and contrary to Macro I'm guessing the answer is local (generation, storage and use), not global distribution via thousands of kms of very expensive, very vulnerable, very lowly efficient giant extension leads.
Only a few posts ago Macro was complaining that no nuclear power plants are designed against 'terrorist threats', now he wants the entire humankind to be dependent on giant global power cables. How you gonna protect them from the same "terrorist threats" ??
That is not very patriotic. Australia has plenty of Copper ore and you should be supporting my idea of the copper ring spanning whole globe. Beside some countries don't have enough sunshine or wind since other have too much.
The worst idea is actually brewing in Austrialia and that is so called ,"green hydrogen.
What an absurd. Instead of shipping pure electrons over cable somebody what complex and inefficient system of hydrogen distribution.
But you are right at one. To have this global copper ring we need global peace. In fact it will never be s single thick cable but rather net of interconnected DC lines very high voltage.
Here is another chance for Australia because we could cover half of the country with solar panels and supply the rest of the world.
Let's do some sums how much copper cable we could do for equivalent of those submarines? 160 bln dollars worth?
I am guessing that will be enough to make extension cord to the Moon and back.
Select to expand quoteMacroscien said..
Let's do some sums how much copper cable we could do for equivalent of those submarines? 160 bln dollars worth?
I am guessing that will be enough to make extension cord to the Moon and back.
I'll take your bet.
If copper is about $8/kg and we assume 630mm2 cable then .... for $160 bln I think you only get about 90% of the way to the moon with one wire, let alone there and back with a complete circuit.
And that is only the price of the raw copper. If you add turning it into cable, a bit of electrical tape to twist around the end and some sky hooks to hold it up, then you don't even get that far. Then there would be the miscellaneous charges they add at the bottom of the bill, plus GST and out-of-hours call out fees.
Plus, even if you did add a bit to get to the moon after 24 hrs the giant cable would be somewhat twisted up around the planet. The apprentice would have hell of a job trying to untangle it all.
But despite any of that ....... why do you want power on the moon ? What are you doing up there ?
The main issue with electric cars is if they become popular then public chargers are going to be in huge demand. Setting up public chargers, especially those that charge up a big battery quickly are going to be expensive to build. Who will pay for it? A service station with petrol and diesel bowsers is paid for by investors and operators. Will it be the same for public chargers?
Perhaps service station owners will put more chargers in their lots. In a way this could be a business opportunity. I've heard the main revenue sources for a service station is sugar, carbohydrates and nicotine. If a car needs just say half an hour to charge, this is time for the driver and passengers to sit down at a cafe, have a coffee and a sandwich or something like that.
Select to expand quoteMobydisc said..
The main issue with electric cars is if they become popular then public chargers are going to be in huge demand.
In the 'burbs they'll charge up at home. Out in the country charging time might depend on the total capacity of the servo, the poles and wires, rather than the limitation of how quickly you can charge a battery without blowing it up. We'll see a return of the VW XL1. Didn't sell back in the day because petrol was so cheap. But out on the highway where a 1/3 size battery charges in 1/3 the time it'll be the vehicle of choice for the travelling salesman, the country vet and IT guy.
The blokes who currently fancy themselves in a Ford Raptor V6 ute might be more comfortable in the electrified Morgan.
Same guy different car.
Most people don't need convincing. They're selling like hotcakes - just not enough of them turning up on slow boats from China. The Tesla 3 was no.4 top seller in August - just behind HiLux, Ranger and Rav4.
www.drive.com.au/news/vfacts-august-2022-new-car-sales-wrap/
Why does someone buy a Tesla? Is it the money saving? The green credentials? They don't want to gas themselves with carbon monoxide?
They like plain cars?
They want people to admire them and ask them questions about their car?
Anyone here own one? If so, why did you buy it?
What if the batteries came in a few standardised sizes that could be changed over in a few minutes at a service station? Maybe you'd need to track the condition of each battery on a central database so that you didn't pay as much for a battery that had degraded and only held a percentage of its original capacity.
Select to expand quoteHarrow said..
What if the batteries came in a few standardised sizes that could be changed over in a few minutes at a service station? Maybe you'd need to track the condition of each battery on a central database so that you didn't pay as much for a battery that had degraded and only held a percentage of its original capacity.
I think that makes a lot of sense for fleets!
Huge bank of PE cells on the roof, charge old units thru the day, swap over at end of shift.
Personally I'm waiting for it to be possible to use car as battery. The wife's car is really only a motorised shopping trolley.
There would be stacks of spare kWhs to run the house at night.
So if we could use the 856kWh we exported for peanuts , we'd only have to buy 300kWh from the grid.
But then I guess, we have to run the car, how many Kms/kWh?
Ok I'll look up the specs for the leaf, we only need a small shopping trolley.
Bugger, I make that 6km/kWh, hmm @ 10,000km/year, that's 1,666kWhs.
That's none to power the house, and we only have enough spare for half our needs.
Maybe more panels are needed?
Have I done my sums correct?
More thinking required
Select to expand quotedecrepit said..Harrow said..
What if the batteries came in a few standardised sizes that could be changed over in a few minutes at a service station? Maybe you'd need to track the condition of each battery on a central database so that you didn't pay as much for a battery that had degraded and only held a percentage of its original capacity.
I think that makes a lot of sense for fleets!
Huge bank of PE cells on the roof, charge old units thru the day, swap over at end of shift.
Personally I'm waiting for it to be possible to use car as battery. The wife's car is really only a motorised shopping trolley.
There would be stacks of spare kWhs to run the house at night.
So if we could use the 856kWh we exported for peanuts , we'd only have to buy 300kWh from the grid.
But then I guess, we have to run the car, how many Kms/kWh?
Ok I'll look up the specs for the leaf, we only need a small shopping trolley.
Bugger, I make that 6km/kWh, hmm @ 10,000km/year, that's 1,666kWhs.
That's none to power the house, and we only have enough spare for half our needs.
Maybe more panels are needed?
Have I done my sums correct?
More thinking required
You are an extremely low user. www.redenergy.com.au/living-energy/smart-homes/how-much-is-the-average-electricity-bill-in-australia
Select to expand quotehilly said.. You are an extremely low user. www.redenergy.com.au/living-energy/smart-homes/how-much-is-the-average-electricity-bill-in-australia
Well there's only the two of us, and we are aware of how to minimise usage.
In our previous, passive solar house, where we didn't need A/C our usage was much less.
Select to expand quoteHarrow said..
What if the batteries came in a few standardised sizes that could be changed over in a few minutes at a service station? Maybe you'd need to track the condition of each battery on a central database so that you didn't pay as much for a battery that had degraded and only held a percentage of its original capacity.
Are you talking about changing the battery after a few thousand cycles or just as part of running the car? Nio sells cars where you can simply swap batteries instead of sitting at a charger. Currently available in China and Norway
www.caranddriver.com/news/a33670482/nio-swappable-batteries-lease/
Select to expand quoteMr Milk said..
Are you talking about changing the battery after a few thousand cycles or just as part of running the car? Nio sells cars where you can simply swap batteries instead of sitting at a charger. Currently available in China and Norway
www.caranddriver.com/news/a33670482/nio-swappable-batteries-lease/
I'm talking about swapping batteries regularly, just as you'd fill up with petrol. Driving to Brisbane? Stop off mid-way for a 5-minute-long battery swap.
And while you're at it, you might as well have a short trip battery option available. We have a car that rarely drives more than 50km in a day, so why lug around a few hundred kilo of unused battery capacity?
A question for the EV nerds. There are plenty of older Tesla S vehicles available, this one is a 2015 model. It has traveled 125,000 kms so has been charged at least 2500 times. They want over 100k for it.
You would want to know what the battery condition is as a replacement would be super expensive if available. Do these EV's have some type of self test function that shows battery condition?
www.carsales.com.au/cars/details/2015-tesla-model-s-p85d-auto-awd/SSE-AD-13404694/?Cr=0>s=SSE-AD-13404694>sSaleId=SSE-AD-13404694>sViewType=showcase&rankingType=showcase
Select to expand quoteHarrow said..
Driving to Brisbane? Stop off mid-way for a 5-minute-long battery swap.
Only 5 minute breaks all the way to Brisbane! I need at least 30. And not often I go for 2 hrs. Not hard to fill in. Fill the tank, roll over to maccas, order the burger, the McCafe, find the loo, stretch and yawn for a bit, browse the smart phone. What sort of break do others take?
I'm sure highway servos will soon come up with some money-extracting time fillers to stretch it out to 1 hr. Should be able to recharge enough in 1 hr for 2 hrs cruising.
Select to expand quoteHarrow said..
I'm talking about swapping batteries regularly, just as you'd fill up with petrol. Driving to Brisbane? Stop off mid-way for a 5-minute-long battery swap.
"en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Place_(company)"
Select to expand quoteairsail said..
A question for the EV nerds. There are plenty of older Tesla S vehicles available, this one is a 2015 model. It has traveled 125,000 kms so has been charged at least 2500 times. They want over 100k for it.
Is that the one that Harrow wants with the 50km range?
Maybe EVs that want to drive a long distance need to have an in-flight refueling option?
Like a mid-air refuel, you can have someone pull up in ffront of your Tesla, throw an extension cord back, and charge you with extra power from the ICE upfront?
Maybe a special section of freeway setup like dodgem cars, with a nice chicken wire covering to charge you up for ten minutes or so?
Guys at traffic lights that run out to give you a quick charge from their generator, and also cleans the windscreen?
Overhead lines to be used with pantographs have to be set at a a height a metre or so higher than the max allowable height of a truck. This makes it a bit hard to get power all the way down to private transportation vehicles, the pantograph would be too long and spindly. Maybe hold the cable from the vehicle up to the overhead wires with a smart self-tracking drone?
