undefined | Better HN

0 pointsXorNot2y ago0 comments

The heavier you make your counterweight, the more strength you need in your cables.

The problem is that you could solve this by say, lowering a small pallet of whatever to the bottom of the shaft and moving it sideways out of the way - trading "power" for "energy storage".

But if you extend that idea you wind up at "pump a liquid" as the obvious way to do it, since that has essentially no limit on flow-ability.

The other problem of course it lead in the first place: 1000kg of lead at 1500m high is about 4kWh of potential energy. 1000kg of Lead-Acid batteries is about 25 kWh of potential energy. I suppose you could put the batteries on a cable for the extra 4kWh but I suspect the complexity isn't worth it.

0 comments

154573452342y ago

> 1000kg of lead at 1500m high is about 4kWh of potential energy. 1000kg of Lead-Acid batteries is about 25 kWh of potential energy. I suppose you could put the batteries on a cable for the extra 4kWh but I suspect the complexity isn't worth it.

That's just so well said. Should be the top comment every single time this dumb idea is surfaced.

I'm convinced now people are pulling stunts like this just to make renewables look bad.

mnw21cam2y ago

The difference is that 1000kg of lead costs ~US$2000, and lasts forever, but 1000kg of lead-acid batteries costs ~US$9000, but only lasts for 10 years.

XorNotOP2y ago

The mechanical equipment and supporting plant equipment to turn that 1000kg of lead into a power storage system is not free, does not last forever, and experiences mechanical wear and tear - in fact it likely needs constant maintenance on a cycle of weeks to months.

Whereas those Lead-Acid batteries will do their thing for 10 years, then can be recycled into new Lead-Acid batteries and do it again. The support equipment is all solid-state electronics (though still about a 20 year reasonable lifespan).

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse