It seems to me that we should focus on nuclear as a stable energy source (while it is also replacing fossil fuel sources). Having to create huge battery or other storage systems for solar/wind adds huge costs and complexities (ie, there isn't even enough Li to put in cars no less enormous battery banks. Granted, solid state could be a game changer here). Solar and wind are great adjuncts, for instance our solar panels are coming in very handy here in this crazy hot Texas summer.
I'm going to guess that quantum digital finance will be the future as opposed to crypto so maybe that aspect will solve itself.
I've just grazed the surface of that scenario though so I could be off target.
Yes, I agree nuclear is a no brainer and would for sure be a priority if I was making these decisions. Solar/wind ideally supplementary in places where it makes the most sense. For example, I personally think rooftop solar is great, considering it gives the homeowner some freedom/security over their electricity. For large scale utility battery systems, I think we'd really need the alternative battery technology bc of cost like you mention and the material requirements.
As for the DQF, I'm not well versed, but based on that article it looks promising if it were to be backed 1:1 with gold as suggested. There would be other concerns such as is it truly outside control of the government, who is custodian of the gold, and making sure that the gold backing truly remains since we already went through the gradual leveraging and de-pegging to gold in the past. There's other crypto projects as well that are looking to do a gold backed system. I'll keep my eye on it, thanks for sending the article!
Don't buy any argument about Bitcoin and energy. There never should be waste in energy production only poor allocations. Whether Bitcoin is a worthwhile use of energy is an entire other discussion. The storage issue about intermittent uses is critical particularly in areas where the utility is not vertical - the regionals where auctions dominate and renewable can be cheaper compared to facilities where stand-by reliability and quick ramp is needed (gas + oil backup or coal fired). The auctions place fixed capacity at a disadvantage but it's an arcane point.
Pending Vanadium flow or Sodium, etc we always have lead-acid which likely still backs up many teleco switching centers. We know how to recycle and materials are easy. Still both for Li-ion and Pb acid, the size of these batteries at utility scale is stunning - swimming pool(s) worth. We need a lot more than an hour of storage. In days past I've seen telco battery rooms of > 1500 sq ft full of battery racks. Servicing such rooms is a full time job with pallets outside of new and old batteries. And, of course, a diesel generator outside ready for the long haul.
Of course the obvious in nuclear but more tilted toward newer modular reactors. Research has been stalled for years by the same greens that now see Germany reverting to coal. Progress can't come soon enough.
It seems to me that we should focus on nuclear as a stable energy source (while it is also replacing fossil fuel sources). Having to create huge battery or other storage systems for solar/wind adds huge costs and complexities (ie, there isn't even enough Li to put in cars no less enormous battery banks. Granted, solid state could be a game changer here). Solar and wind are great adjuncts, for instance our solar panels are coming in very handy here in this crazy hot Texas summer.
I'm going to guess that quantum digital finance will be the future as opposed to crypto so maybe that aspect will solve itself.
I've just grazed the surface of that scenario though so I could be off target.
https://www.11onze.cat/en/magazine/all-set-quantum-financial-system/
Yes, I agree nuclear is a no brainer and would for sure be a priority if I was making these decisions. Solar/wind ideally supplementary in places where it makes the most sense. For example, I personally think rooftop solar is great, considering it gives the homeowner some freedom/security over their electricity. For large scale utility battery systems, I think we'd really need the alternative battery technology bc of cost like you mention and the material requirements.
As for the DQF, I'm not well versed, but based on that article it looks promising if it were to be backed 1:1 with gold as suggested. There would be other concerns such as is it truly outside control of the government, who is custodian of the gold, and making sure that the gold backing truly remains since we already went through the gradual leveraging and de-pegging to gold in the past. There's other crypto projects as well that are looking to do a gold backed system. I'll keep my eye on it, thanks for sending the article!
Don't buy any argument about Bitcoin and energy. There never should be waste in energy production only poor allocations. Whether Bitcoin is a worthwhile use of energy is an entire other discussion. The storage issue about intermittent uses is critical particularly in areas where the utility is not vertical - the regionals where auctions dominate and renewable can be cheaper compared to facilities where stand-by reliability and quick ramp is needed (gas + oil backup or coal fired). The auctions place fixed capacity at a disadvantage but it's an arcane point.
Pending Vanadium flow or Sodium, etc we always have lead-acid which likely still backs up many teleco switching centers. We know how to recycle and materials are easy. Still both for Li-ion and Pb acid, the size of these batteries at utility scale is stunning - swimming pool(s) worth. We need a lot more than an hour of storage. In days past I've seen telco battery rooms of > 1500 sq ft full of battery racks. Servicing such rooms is a full time job with pallets outside of new and old batteries. And, of course, a diesel generator outside ready for the long haul.
Of course the obvious in nuclear but more tilted toward newer modular reactors. Research has been stalled for years by the same greens that now see Germany reverting to coal. Progress can't come soon enough.