Your only argument here seems to be space and I don’t see that as a big problem. A few soccer fields worth of land distributed in the vicinity of each bigger city doesn’t seem like a lot to me.

It's 1000x "a few soccer fields" for a city like Berlin, and we have zero other working grid level storage facilities in the world at that scale. The handful that do exist are <100MWh, and are meant for specific situations, not for powering 100% renewable cities. No one is building grid-level storage, it's a pipe dream. But it's pushed as a solution because the fossil fuel industry knows it will never happen, but what will happen is more fossil fuel plants will be built.

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Have i Not Just calculated that the storage for one day for berlin would be like a few soccer fields? How many days do you think is necessary to be prepared for completely no power input? 10? That's 100ish soccer fields with 2020s battery technology. Stop spreading that bullshit.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Did you miss this?

Some numbers. This facility stores 1400MWh, on 2,000 acres or (~8,000,000 sq meters) Much greater then your 40,000sq meter estimate. Plus you said about 33GWh for a day. Well you’d need ~24 of these facilities to cover just Berlin.

You estimated 40,000sq meters, but that is off by a factor 2000. This is for a facility that actually exists. Theoretically it could be improved, but those theories aren't being built right now. So based on a grid storage plant that actually exists, berlin would need 48,000 times more square meters dedicated to energy storage then you estimated and in any case, THEY DON'T EXIST and aren't being built.

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 1 points 4 months ago

No I didn't miss that but taking an explorative pilot project as the defacto standard and then rejecting that it might be possible to build something more space efficient is not how the world works