121
submitted 19 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) by Dot@feddit.org to c/technology@lemmy.world

nuclear power produces long-lived radioactive waste, which needs to be stored securely. Nuclear fuels, such as the element uranium (which needs to be mined), are finite, so the technology is not considered renewable. Renewable sources of energy, such as solar and wind power suffer from “intermittency”, meaning they do not consistently produce energy at all hours of the day.

fusion technologies have yet to produce sustained net energy output (more energy than is put in to run the reactor), let alone produce energy at the scale required to meet the growing demands of AI. Fusion will require many more technological developments before it can fulfil its promise of delivering power to the grid.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

We do not currently have the battery tech to have a fully renewables-powered grid where batteries are used for the regular dips in production wind and solar have.

We likely won't have infrastructure like that in place for decades.

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Do you know what they do in Norway with out-of-use old mines? They lift a load when there's energy to be stored. They lower it when there's energy to be spent. I'm sure you know how electric engines work and that the conversion is symmetric.

No battery tech involved.

Battery tech is in general mostly relevant for autonomous devices we carry, for airplanes and ships, for cars.

For the central grid the ways to store energy are almost inifinite.

[-] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

In situations where that's feasible, it's good. But it's far from feasible all the time.

You certainly couldn't replace all existing fossil fuels with it, or even scratch the surface really.

Norway can do stuff like this because they have the geography for it, as well as a population that's like a 15th of the UK or a 60th of the US. They don't actually need much energy.

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

They need heating at winter and they have datacenters and a lot of renewable energy.

Also the principles I've described is applicable for everything non-autonomous, and one could think of "electric" cars (a bit like trams) which would use contacts on the ground for energy, while when they'd need to be autonomous, they'd use batteries or ICEs.

That kind of "mechanical energy storage" can be created everywhere. I mean, water reserves with hydroelectric stations downstream are already used for that purpose, but for those you need water.

Efficiency is a bit of a problem - you have to maintain the mechanical parts, you first use energy to lift something with losses and then generate energy from letting it slide back...

That's all a bit off topic, really.

What's important is that there are ways around lithium for a lot of energy usage of our civilization.

[-] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 0 points 6 hours ago

Can you back this up with links to reputable sources?

[-] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Can you back up your original claim - that we can sufficiently power all of our grids with current batteries, and that current battery manufacturing is enough to do so?

With reputable sources.

this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2024
121 points (88.5% liked)

Technology

58698 readers
5139 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS