Some key insights from the article:

Basically, what they did was to look at how much batteries would be needed in a given area to provide constant power supply at least 97% of the time, and the calculate the costs of that solar+battery setup compared to coal and nuclear.

  • psud@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 个月前

    The diagram shows that they fall short on winter mornings

    My own modelling to decide what size battery I want for my house says it’s easy almost every day, but when you have three rainy and overcast days in a row you need a battery far larger or an alternative. For me the alternative is the grid; at grid scale it’s gas generators

    • wewbull@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 个月前

      If somebody has to keep that gas generator serviced only to run it on winter mornings, that electricity is going to be very pricey.

      • psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 个月前

        Indeed, but cheaper than enough batteries to cover those times

        In the off grid home scale one I’d size and set the generator to run for several hours in a row to fully charge the battery on days when the battery was at a sufficiently low charge entering the night, at least that’s what my current modelling suggests. Diesel gensets work best when running fully loaded for at least long enough to warm up

        I guess at grid scale you find the sweet spot where most years the gas power station and batteries are balanced to provide cheapest power averaged over the year