News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Stacking concrete blocks is a surprisingly efficient way ... by jondubois on Sunday August 19, 2018 @08:05AM (#17793939)
Why doesn't it just lift a single extremely large block when electricity surges and then very slowly drops it back down to generate electricity (no need for complex hook-and-release)? The maximum capacity would be determined by the maximum height of the tower along which the block is lifted.

Or why doesn't it just have many medium motors; each permanently attached to a single medium-sized block? Why should the relationships between motors and blocks be one-to-many?

Lots of small concrete blocks, a camera and a hook to latch onto them one at a time sounds overly complicated and error-prone - Not to mention how much precious time would be wasted getting the hook through the holes and then coordinating the lifting so that each block ends up stacked nicely.

Re:Stacking concrete blocks is a surprisingly efficient way ... by mrtksn on Sunday August 19, 2018 @08:28AM (#17794021)
Maybe the materials can't withstand such extreme forces? After all, the same logic would apply to any system that stores mechanical energy.

Can you, for example, make a mechanical watch by compressing liquid instead of a spring?

Re:Stacking concrete blocks is a surprisingly efficient way ... by PeterisP on Sunday August 19, 2018 @12:39PM (#17794963)
The obvious answer is expense; the motor-generator part is the expensive part of the system (both in building and in maintenance) so you don't want a larger motor if a smaller will do, and you don't want more motors if fewer one will do.

For such a system, time isn't precious, hardware is.

Re:Stacking concrete blocks is a surprisingly efficient way ... by canam on Sunday August 19, 2018 @09:25AM (#17794207)
Or maybe one block per house. Solar raises it though the day, generates electricity at night as it lowers. No grid required.
Re:Stacking concrete blocks is a surprisingly efficient way ... by jondubois on Sunday August 19, 2018 @11:20AM (#17794598)
Nice, that sounds even better.