Batteries are changing the way we will employ renewable energy sources.
The problem with solar and wind turbines is that they are never 24-7. To make matters worse, the human race tends to use a lot more power first thing in the morning and in early evening (at “peak”) than the rest of the day. Now we have the technology to produce batteries to take in power from the grid at off peak times and feed it back in during the peak demand – economically.
For farmers, as a rough guide, 1 acre = 30MW and typically sites will be 10-49 MW sites. As a very rough guide, 1 MW of battery would earn £2000 pa, index linked, for 20 years. So, if you have from half to one and half acres (allowing for access), give me an e-mail on email@example.com
The USAF cemetry at Maddingly, Cambridge UK. What kind of world are we handing on to our children?
Globally, we are on the edge of a renewable energy revolution. It is not that we did not have the technology, what is different is that the technology, bit by bit, is becoming economic. This bodes well for the human race. However, there is a problem in that much of the economically attractive solutions, especially solar panels, need land. There is a problem with land – they have stopped making it. So we need to use alternatives including never making a roof out of tiles or inactive sheet and, instead, making it of solar panels. We need the land to produce food, fibres and timber – but in a different way. Instead of using mineral Nitrogen which costs at least 21,000 kWh per tonne of N to deliver, we need to feed those crops on urban wastes. It has been done and can be scaled up safely. https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01H63EQX0/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
Nest discussion on this blog; Farming off-grid
Bill Butterworth, Land Research Ltd, December 17
“We get the government we deserve”
- Solar-powered batteries change global political power.
- Solar-powered batteries will change the way we live.
- The fact that no-one is talking about this in the UK election demonstrates the inadequacy of government which is not technology-based.
By Bill Butterworth
3 April 15
Energy bis power. If democracy is to be meaningful, the people must have energy. Renewable energy is changing everything.
Which is more important to the families of the UK; the outcome of the UK parliamentary election or the announcement by Tesla of the USA of a battery that stores electrical power from the solar panels on the roof of a house and allows at least a level of less need of paying the electricity bill from the big suppliers and maybe, with solar, wind and other forms of renewable energy, complete independence?
Well, democracy is fundamentally important. However, one wonders whether a change of government does anything more than tinker at the edges. The truth is that there are very bright people in elected government and the Civil Service. However, there are very few, very very few, scientists or technologists. The truth is that government has no structure at the top level that makes decisions (never mind the “advisors”) that understands the impact and consequences of technological developments. So here are some thoughts to ponder.
- On the face of it, the development of batteries could, in the long run, allow the building of power-independent domestic households. The step by Tesla is dramatic but batteries will have to improve (in time they will) to give complete independence.
- This will change the business of power distribution.
- For the majority of us, this will take a very long time, generations in fact.
- This particular technology is currently based on Lithium. There is not enough in the face of this earth to put a battery in every household and, bear in mind, the Chinese control about 80% of the known world supply.
How much are the politicians wishing to be elected into the new parliament are talking about this? At the time of writing this post, I have of heard none. What can be done about, yet again, the Chinese out-thinking us in planning the future of its industry? The fact is that our democracy is not science and technology based and, therefore is fundamentally weak.
By the way, this blog has talked about micro-organism-power batteries – see April 6 and 15. Science is just about common dense and evidence. Without that, democracy flounders.