Comment

Comment on Grid-Scale Bubble Batteries Will Soon Be Everywhere

Chippys_mittens@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

You understand this isnt about a new way to generate electricity right? This is about a new way to store it. The CO2 is in a CLOSED LOOP system meaning its not going to be leaching into the atmosphere. The issue with many renewables is they can’t operate well in swings. Thats why electricity price is constantly fluctuating, because the demand is. So a sustainable way to store renewable generated energy will be able to accommodate those swings in demand in a way plain solar panels/wind/hydro alone can’t. The CO2 is likely harvested directly from the atmosphere. Once the battery has X amount of CO2 it no longer needs more because again, its a closed loop.

source

Sort:hotnew top

lightnsfw@reddthat.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

The CO2 is likely harvested directly from the atmosphere.

What makes you think that? I just did a little googling and didn’t find a source that commercial co2 comes from the air. The best case scenario I found was it being a byproduct of other processes. Although I’m doing this on my phone so maybe I missed something.

source
- Chippys_mittens@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  A process called DAC (Direct Air Capture) is currently used on medium scale to do this. Other instances in which they obtain CO2 is by capturing byproduct of industrial processes or power plants. Again though, and I dont think this is sinking in, it is a closed loop system. So, once enough CO2 is captured, thats all that battery will ever need. Its not using new fuel to create more co2 it’s taking a specific amount from currently available, filling the battery ONCE then process over. You didn’t adress anything else I said.
  
  source
amino@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

The CO2 is in a CLOSED LOOP system meaning its not going to be leaching into the atmosphere.

yeah, sure thing buddy. the CO2 will be in a closed loop until it won’t. just like Fukushima and Chernobyl were supposed to be closed loop systems, until they weren’t. disasters happen, no matter how much the techbro mindset insists that they’re impossible.

The CO2 is likely harvested directly from the atmosphere

LMAO, the audacity of telling me I don’t know how electricity generation works when you don’t even know how to read. they’re using industrial CO2 derived from fossil fuels

source
- partial_accumen@lemmy.world ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  
  yeah, sure thing buddy. the CO2 will be in a closed loop until it won’t. just like Fukushima and Chernobyl were supposed to be closed loop systems, until they weren’t. disasters happen, no matter how much the techbro mindset insists that they’re impossible.
  
  So you concern is the ecological impact should this bubble fail and the entirety of the CO2 is released to the atmosphere as pollution? Did you even read the article? They discuss that.
  
  First, a full on failure would be rare. Then, a full on failure of 100% loss of the closed loop CO2 is equivalent to 15 round trip flights of a jet flying from New York to London. To put it in perspective there about 250+ flights of this length per day from London, with many being much much farther.
  
  So you’re comparing the impacts of a once in a lifetime nuclear power plant failure to the impacts of another source 1/16th of something that already happens every in one airport. Your logic is why out of whack on this if this is your concern with the bubble.
  
  source
- Chippys_mittens@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  So you’re against nuclear power too?
  
  source