Storage ideas

[Stinsy]

You’re not allowed to connect a power source to the grid via a 13A plug.

551.7.2(ii): “The Microgenerator (solar panels) must not be connected to the final circuit by means of a Plug and Socket”

Spoilsports, they've anticipated an idiot like me! I'd still like to do it...

Its legal in some other European countries but probably limited to small amounts of power. I remember the Mastervolt Soladin 600w inverter came with a two pin euro plug on the end to plug directly into the mains. In the UK you had to cut it off.

https://cordis.europa.eu/article/id/418 ... ble-energy

https://www.nic-e.shop/en/produkt/eet-solmate-b/

Americans too. YouTube is full of videos where Americans build DIY solar setups involving astonishingly-inefficient eBay/Amazon quality inverters that are plugged straight into a socket.

[AE-NMidlands]

I think Thunderfoot had a field day with the crane; something about wind.

Q: So if HEP (pumped storage) is so obvious and easy, why aren't there thousands of them in development or being rolled out already?
A: because a) it's difficult to find geologicaly stable places where you could put it
b) water is often in short supply where energy is most needed
plus lots of other reasons.
Pumped storage can't be so easy, or all these other options would not be being explored.

[dan_b]

This lot reckons there are over half a million suitable pumped hydro sites around the globe.
The technology is proven - it's "just" a case of lots of earth moving.

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/01/05/ ... 818-sites/

[Stinsy]

The benefit of pumped hydro is the millions of tonnes of media available for free.

[AE-NMidlands]

This lot reckons there are over half a million suitable pumped hydro sites around the globe.
The technology is proven - it's "just" a case of lots of earth moving.

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/01/05/ ... 818-sites/

so why aren't they powering ahead? (Any of them.) The devil is in the detail: water available in the wrong place, power needed thousands of miles away and HV connectors make the overall scheme unviable... (even if the geology is suitable for a brand new lake at the top of a mountain.) The Thatcherites tell us that market is infallible, so there's your verdict

by Stinsy » Tue Jul 27, 2021 4:37 pm
The benefit of pumped hydro is the millions of tonnes of media available for free.

Apart from seawater and a mountain range adjacent to a coast where no-one cares about the environmental implications, I am afraid it isn't.
I bet even the Scottish scheme pumping seawater up to somewhere SE of Inverness (if I remember it correctly) would never get past an environmental impact assessment.
However I am surprised that nothing has been done with the Dead Sea or the big salt lake below sea level in N Africa. Both of those might improve the local climate by introducing lots of evaporation where it is sorely needed.

[CrofterMannie]

by Stinsy » Tue Jul 27, 2021 4:37 pm
The benefit of pumped hydro is the millions of tonnes of media available for free.

Apart from seawater and a mountain range adjacent to a coast where no-one cares about the environmental implications, I am afraid it isn't.
I bet even the Scottish scheme pumping seawater up to somewhere SE of Inverness (if I remember it correctly) would never get past an environmental impact assessment.
However I am surprised that nothing has been done with the Dead Sea or the big salt lake below sea level in N Africa. Both of those might improve the local climate by introducing lots of evaporation where it is sorely needed.

Which is why there is an existing pumped scheme on Loch Ness and another one now has planning permission. A huge body of fresh water with high ground right next to it (and a couple of GW of power generation within a few of miles).

Civil engineering projects of the size of a pumped storage scheme are a lot harder to get approval for and involve a lot more disruption to communities than just about anything else.

[AE-NMidlands]

Which is why there is an existing pumped scheme on Loch Ness and another one now has planning permission. A huge body of fresh water with high ground right next to it (and a couple of GW of power generation within a few of miles).

It took me a long time to find out about the Foyers scheme, I'm surprised it is so well hidden, especially as it was re-purposed as pumped-storage in 1969, then expanded in 1975.
I'm glad Red John is going ahead, but this is just another one in the whole of the UK.
Both are entirely freshwater, so the scope for more is limited by geography. No news of any using seawater...
(p.s. I forgot the smallish on in N Wales re-purposing flooded slate quarries?)

Civil engineering projects of the size of a pumped storage scheme are a lot harder to get approval for and involve a lot more disruption to communities than just about anything else.

Exactly my point. Not to mention the environmental impacts to be assessed and either ignored or accommodated somehow.
Which is why all sorts of electro-mechanical things should be being tried out as well to see whether they are a better bet than massive battery banks full of toxic stuff which go BANG if there is a short-circuit somewhere.

[Ken]

The main problem with any large infrastructure work is that the upfront costs are very large often amounting to 50% of the total costs. The total costs are in one big amount and cannot be built in stages or added to later. Another biggy is that the hydro company has to pay for the leccy connection and also get charged by the grid twice, once for incoming leccy and once for outgoing. Its the same type of problem that prevents wind farms on the Outer Hebrides which have some of the largest capacity factors in the world.

The profit from hydro is along way after building and who knows what market they will be selling into 20 to 50yrs down the line. Look how the prices of solar and wind power have plumitted.

I cant see that pumped hydro is a good investment without CfD type subsidy like the nuclear.

[AE-NMidlands]

I was surprised to find this just now - I know it isn't pumped storage, but all the same...
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... re-us-dams says

Last February, 68 of the country’s top salmon and fisheries experts sent a letter to north-west leaders stating that in order to avoid extinction and restore the once abundant salmon runs, these four dams would need to be removed. Two months later, American Rivers listed the Snake as the country’s most endangered river, citing the dams, along with the climate crisis and poor water quality, as its biggest threats.
A Columbia River system impact statement last year reported that breaching these dams would have the greatest positive impact on Snake River salmon.

and

In 2016, it was reported that the four dams were producing on average over 1,000 megawatts of energy each year – or enough to power 800,000 American homes. But as the renewable energy sector continues to shift and hydropower competes against low-cost renewable energy, including solar and wind, there is some uncertainty when it comes to what the future will look like for the industry.

[dan_b]

There were plans to build some more pumped hydro in the abandoned slate quarries in North Wales - permission was granted in 2017, but looks like nothing has happened since?

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/first-new ... -go-ahead/

There were also originally plans to build another large pumped hydro scheme in Exmoor at the same time that Dinorwig was built to support the UK's expansion of nuclear back then, but well we all know what happened with Thatcher's dash for gas instead...

These are huge civil engineering projects - Dinorwig took 10 years to excavate and construct - which means huge amounts of capital spent up front with a very long tail for payback. Without a centralised state-funded National Electricity infrastructure it's no wonder they don't get built.