News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Cash Squeeze at Tesla, SolarCity by marvin on Friday September 02, 2016 @03:33AM (#12411512)
Do you have a reference for the hydroelectric storage number? Does this include hydroelectric dams without reverse-pumping capability, which still do have the capacity to perform fast grid leveling?
Re:Cash Squeeze at Tesla, SolarCity by semi-extrinsic on Friday September 02, 2016 @04:00AM (#12411620)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectric...

I believe this number only includes dams with reverse pumping. The global production capacity for all hydroelectric power is much larger, but it's not a widely used number, since you typically don't empty a reservoir due to the lower water having less potential energy.

So this capacity number is a bit theoretical, since you wouldn't use it that way in practice. But then again, so is the capacity number for batteries, since you really want to avoid doing a full discharge.

Annual global hydroelectric production is a more useful number, and is a little more than 4 000 TWh.

Re:Cash Squeeze at Tesla, SolarCity by marvin on Friday September 02, 2016 @05:00AM (#12411811)
Cool, thanks. I wasn't aware that pumped hydroelectric had this great installed capacity. Those are very big numbers. Of course, it isn't an either/or proposition, since pumped hydroelectric is limited by geography. Battery-supported grid levelling can also be installed locally at each residential solar project, which makes adoption less of a political case.