Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by pfdietz on Friday June 17, 2022 @07:21PM
(#31785742)
Pumped hydro doesn't require a stream, since it isn't harvesting energy from a preexisting flow of water.
Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by WalterBright on Friday June 17, 2022 @09:36PM
(#31786582)
How are you going to create a large enough pond?
Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by pfdietz on Saturday June 18, 2022 @02:31PM
(#31792471)
This involves moving earth in places with suitable topography. The economics depends on both the vertical offset between the two reservoirs, and how much earth has to be moved per unit of reservoir volume.
Algorithms have been created to use GIS data to automatically find potential PHES sites. There are lots of candidates. Australia, for example, has 300x more potential that it would need for a 100% renewable grid.
Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by ncmncm on Saturday June 18, 2022 @08:12PM
(#31794961)
Often there is already a depression you can use as is. Or deepen, and use the excavation for a dike.
If not, maybe there is a box canyon you can close the end of with a dam.
In places, they have flattened a convex hilltop and used the material to make a dike.
Usually you don't need anywhere near as much storage volume as a typical hydroelectric dam reservoir holds.
Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by ncmncm on Saturday June 18, 2022 @12:29AM
(#31787257)
Maybe read up? When you just make shit up as you go along, you say dumb things.
Re:Nuclear is back on the table for a green future
by WalterBright on Saturday June 18, 2022 @03:09AM
(#31787817)
Asking a question is not making things up.
There are indeed many unused mineshafts, but a shaft would be only suitable for a small weight, maybe enough for a single house. This does not scale.