News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by dwyerm on Thursday May 24, 2018 @11:12AM (#17144764)
> it's a fairly energetic explosion

So is a lithium battery explosion. So is a gasoline explosion. So is a flour mill explosion. So is a wind turbine explosion.

Energy is energy, and losing control of energy is never great, no matter where it comes from. So while I catch your meaning, it might be better to phrase it with respect to how controllable that energy is.

From what I know of flywheel storage, the problem mostly comes down to keeping the wheel from coming apart, and containing it when it does. The nice thing about using flywheels for grid storage is that you can bury them and make them large. The earth contains your explosion risk and the lack of jostling means that your bearings don't need to take as much stress and limits that failure risk.

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by throwaway5752 on Thursday May 24, 2018 @11:41AM (#17145078)
I would disagree with you slightly. Energy is not totally fungible. I can punch you in the face or shoot you with a gamma ray (edit: though of course, I would never do either), and it would have very different effects, potentially. Same for a fastball vs a small caliber weapon. Heat, light, and kinetic energy are important distinctions - particularly when you have a bunch of 30k flywheels in close proximity and one of them catastrophically fails. Now, I know that's the first thing someone would think about deploying a bunch of them and they would take precautions. Li batteries are less kinetic and more thermal and that's a bit easier to manage/less likely to cascade.

I thought the trend in flywheels was magnetic suspension and removing mechanical linkages? Admittedly I haven't kept up.

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by microcolonel on Thursday May 24, 2018 @11:49AM (#17145164)
> that's a bit easier to manage/less likely to cascade.

What gives you that impression? Seems to me that it explodes if you contain it, and if you don't contain it, it can spout jets of thermal energy at virtually any angle. With flywheels you need to arrest it in bulk heavy objects that don't tend to sustain fire. That seems a lot simpler to me.

The bigger problems with flywheels are cost of manufacture and (depending on the technology used) efficiency for overnight storage.

> I thought the trend in flywheels was magnetic suspension and removing mechanical linkages? Admittedly I haven't kept up.

IIRC flywheels with limited motion gimbals (to reduce the tolerances on the wheel) are becoming more popular, still magnetic bearings.

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by throwaway5752 on Thursday May 24, 2018 @11:59AM (#17145257)
What gives you that impression?

Insulation is cheap, effective, and very compact. And it's easy to transfer heat quickly, also (either via injecting lots of cold extinguisher or flush lots of hot oxidizing gas)?

Cool, thanks for the update on flywheels. I ... am not trying to create a false dilemna, here. Fuel cells for stranded methane deposits are great. Flywheels have outstanding responsiveness and energy density. Li / compressed air / pumped water et al scale well. They all fit into a more resilient grid storage strategy that permits a transition to periodic sources of input from non-renewable base load.

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by wbl on Thursday May 24, 2018 @02:37PM (#17146950)
Except we've had a carbon free baseload tech for decades now.
Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by throwaway5752 on Thursday May 24, 2018 @04:21PM (#17148004)
It's kind of bizarre how nuclear had achieved a sort of counterculture renaissance. It has many, many drawbacks too numerous to go into here that are technical and sociological in nature.

And anyway, you tried to be too clever. I said "non-renewable" and not "carbon free" just to avoid this conversation. Unless you can start synthesizing utility grade quantities of well-behaved fissile material at a net energy surplus then it's not renewable even if we have decades/centuries of supply.

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by paulmd on Thursday May 24, 2018 @04:54PM (#17148322)
> Unless you can start synthesizing utility grade quantities of well-behaved fissile material at a net energy surplus then it's not renewable even if we have decades/centuries of supply.

Someday, even the Sun will run out of fuel. In the long run, we are all dead - unless someone figures out how to reverse entropy.

http://www.multivax.com/last_question.html

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by glenneroo on Thursday May 24, 2018 @07:50PM (#17149516)
We still have 5 billion years to figure that out. Until then we should probably stick to worrying about energy problems of today.

edit: Love reading that short story, it somehow never gets old.

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by paulmd on Friday May 25, 2018 @08:55AM (#17153174)
We don't need billions of years though, "hundreds of years" of fuel is hopefully long enough for us to figure out the tech that will get us through the next couple hundred years after that. And nuclear is fine for that. We're not talking kicking the can down the road by 20 years, we're talking hundreds or perhaps thousands of years of fuel.

Humans are plenty smart and the people of tomorrow will be better equipped to solve tomorrow's problems.

It's not even a matter of "ripping off a band aid" and paneling up the planet - solar panels aren't going to last hundreds of years either, we will be lucky to get 30 years out of them. Can we make more, sure, but we could also do nuclear and then make solar panels in 500 years when we're running out of fuel.

The biggest problems are that we need to come up with the political will to reprocess waste (extracting additional usable fuel and compacting the amount of true waste that needs to be disposed of) and then dispose of it in a proper repository rather than just letting it sit around on-site indefinitely Fukushima-style.

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by throwaway5752 on Thursday May 24, 2018 @05:49PM (#17148774)
If you listen very hard, you can hear my eyes rolling through your computer. But I enjoyed reading the story and begrudgingly admire your pedantry on the matter!
Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by paulmd on Friday May 25, 2018 @11:13AM (#17154446)
Some animes have theorized a different method for reversing entropy. Like nuclear fission, we may be able to release a tremendous amount of energy by smashing the dreams of young girls and harnessing the power of their tears.

https://wiki.puella-magi.net/Thermodynamics

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by strken on Thursday May 24, 2018 @05:55PM (#17148813)
It's not renewable, but it is closer to carbon-neutral than fossil fuels. Advocates generally push it as a stopgap measure for climate change, after we transition away from baseload coal and before we transition to baseload renewables.
Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by samatman on Thursday May 24, 2018 @03:04PM (#17147212)
Batteries don't like insulation, in fact preferring active cooling.

Which is itself a good thermal-runaway damper, to speak to the second sentence of your second paragraph.

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by throwaway5752 on Thursday May 24, 2018 @04:22PM (#17148023)
Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by reaperducer on Thursday May 24, 2018 @12:26PM (#17145601)
>So is a flour mill explosion

Having witnesses a corn silo explosion, I was unprepared for the ferocity of that ignition.

>So is a wind turbine explosion

Off to YouTube...

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by dwyerm on Thursday May 24, 2018 @03:39PM (#17147533)
The Hornslet collapse[1] is the one I was thinking about in particular. It is especially daunting now that I've toured a site for myself. Those things are huge!

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornslet_wind-turbine_collapse

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by vvanders on Thursday May 24, 2018 @02:07PM (#17146664)
Ever seen a tire come off of a semi?

Assuming the flywheel keeps its integrity it's much harder to predict the "blast radius" of where that thing is going to go.

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by blevin on Thursday May 24, 2018 @02:44PM (#17147018)
Are buried flywheels used in practice? Is the flywheel axis aligned with the Earth rotation axis? Do they pull a vacuum around it?
Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by dredmorbius on Thursday May 24, 2018 @05:35PM (#17148647)
Yes, in cases, to the first two. Containment is frequently buried concrete vaults.

Not AFAIK for the last, though precessional torque bearing load is a nontrivial consideration.

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by blevin on Sunday May 27, 2018 @01:33PM (#17168011)
Thanks for this response. My untrained guess is that precessional torque would cause more loss than air friction, assuming the wheel is cleanly symmetric (ex. no bolt heads sticking out). It's fascinating how many paths there are to push something up various kinds of potential energy gradient in a way that it mostly stays there by itself but is still available to us to access in a controllable way.

Wikipedia claims flywheel loss rate circa 2013 of 5% per day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flywheel_storage_power_system

That compares to recent estimates of Tesla li-ion loss rates at under 5% per month -- 0.16% per day.

Amber Kinetics is one company building fixed flywheel storage products. http://amberkinetics.com/

They have one 32 kWh, 5-ton, 98% steel flywheel installation on Oahu; pictures here: http://amberkinetics.com/hawaiian-electric-and-amber-kinetic...

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by dredmorbius on Monday May 28, 2018 @03:22AM (#17171037)
Frictionaal losses are part of the consideration, but just plain bearing wear is a bigger one AFAIU.

Angular momentum in 100 kWh - multi MWh rotational systems is large.

Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by ballenf on Thursday May 24, 2018 @11:43AM (#17145093)
Also flywheels don't give off noxious fumes during failure.
Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by naravara on Thursday May 24, 2018 @01:02PM (#17146024)
For now. If you want to use one for long term energy storage, though, you're going to need to invent some kind of room temperature superconductor and frictionless surfaces. Who knows whether those would be noxious or not.
Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by smaddox on Thursday May 24, 2018 @03:27PM (#17147394)
Why? Magnetic bearings and copper work just fine...
Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by jhayward on Friday May 25, 2018 @12:48AM (#17150700)
Are you sure? Metal fumes and vaporized epoxies are usually pretty toxic.
Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by tossandturn on Thursday May 24, 2018 @12:54PM (#17145925)
...or during production (relatively speaking).
Re:Ditch the Batteries: Off-Grid Compressed Air Energy Storage by Florin_Andrei on Thursday May 24, 2018 @01:38PM (#17146340)
> So is a lithium battery explosion. So is a gasoline explosion. So is a flour mill explosion. So is a wind turbine explosion.

No, they're not all the same.

Compressed air, flywheel, flour mill - very dramatic events.

Lithium battery - much more mild, typically.

Gasoline - it depends.