• jj4211@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Even then, the value prop is questionable.

    It treats sustainable energy dedicated to this purpose as “free”, ignoring the opportunity cost of using that energy directly.

    For example, let’s say I dedicated my solar exclusively to making gasoline. I could get about 14 gallons a month of “free” gasoline… Except my home power bill would go up about 150 dollars a month… opportunity cost would be over 10 dollars a gallon…

    • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Sure, for a homeowner it doesn’t make sense. But what about at grid scale when there isn’t enough demand for that electricity?

      What opportunity cost is there to NOT do it when the power would otherwise be wasted or generation capacity reduced? If anything, I’d say the opportunity cost is of not doing this with over generation on the grid/plant

      • jj4211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        How much do we have an over generation problem in general though? I suppose the argument would be that solar is curtailed because they don’t want to deal with the potential for overgeneration, but we already have a number of approaches for energy storage. Their pricing for generating at most a gallon a day is a price exceeding a battery system of LFP that could do a lot more than a gallon of gas. This is ignoring the rather significant potential of Sodium batteries.

        So this doesn’t look to be cheaper than battery systems, it looks to be way less efficient than battery systems. The biggest use case as energy storage in general seems to be if you want it to spend a few months (but not too many months, fuel degrades in the tank after all). The more narrow use case is to cater to scenarios where you absolutely need the energy density of gasoline, so boats and airplanes critically so, maybe some heavy equipment. I’ll grant that, but if particularly sodium batteries will be an acceptable approach, it’ll be better than this solution in that very wide variety of circumstances.

        • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          Over generation is very big. I agree batteries are better, though.

          We need to be able to support peak winter heating and peak summer cooling and we need to do that with excess margin.

          Everything in between we have excess power, unless it’s something like hydro dams which are easy to control and aren’t a big extra cost and part of how they naturally operate.

          We generally use gas peaker plants to help which we can turn off or on, but it’s more efficient to not do that, and those are expensive.

          It would also make it easier to build big nuclear plants if we could manage the off peak load into batteries for the day.