PowerSwitch from coal

For technical discussions about electricity, electrical equipment with particular emphasis on safe and compliant installations.
Off topic remarks are liable to be moved elsewhere, or in extreme cases to be deleted.
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin
Posts: 12597
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 2:35 am
Location: Newbury, Berkshire
Contact:

Post by kenneal - lagger »

BritDownUnder wrote:..............As for your lead acids lasting 10 years did they do an 80% cycle every day for that time?
No!. I have tried to keep them to a 50% cycle twice a day and managed most of the time.
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez
User avatar
clv101
Site Admin
Posts: 8854
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:09 am
Contact:

Post by clv101 »

I think it's unlikely that lithium batteries are the best choice for large static deployments. The key requirements for a phone, laptop, power tools or even a car are weight, volume, robustness (can be dropped, turned upside down etc).... And cost.

For static deployments weight, volume and robustness are far less important.

The reason lithium is getting all the attention is because the technology is already on the shelf and phone/laptops have already driven the price right down. If grid scale battery storage takes off in the coming decade I don't think it'll be based on lithium chemistries.
vtsnowedin
Posts: 6596
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 10:14 pm
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

Post by vtsnowedin »

clv101 wrote:I think it's unlikely that lithium batteries are the best choice for large static deployments. The key requirements for a phone, laptop, power tools or even a car are weight, volume, robustness (can be dropped, turned upside down etc).... And cost.

For static deployments weight, volume and robustness are far less important.

The reason lithium is getting all the attention is because the technology is already on the shelf and phone/laptops have already driven the price right down. If grid scale battery storage takes off in the coming decade I don't think it'll be based on lithium chemistries.
I quite agree. In years past there was enough turning flywheels/ turbines to keep the grid stable but with the growth of renewables and their intermittency problems the need for storage is a new problem that is perhaps not all that difficult and comes down to the best way to go about it. The people actually buying the batteries or other hardware will sort out which method is most cost effective using their actual wholesale costs they face and it does not matter to you or I which method proves to be the lowest cost option. That we have more then one option that appear to be viable is encouraging.
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin
Posts: 12597
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 2:35 am
Location: Newbury, Berkshire
Contact:

Post by kenneal - lagger »

I think that it has been important to stress on this forum that Li-ion batteries aren't the answer to all questions because we get a lot of visitors who are looking for answers and advice on domestic applications where lead acid batteries are the obvious and cheapest answer to solar energy storage questions even when applying a 50% depth of discharge restraint.
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez
User avatar
adam2
Site Admin
Posts: 8287
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 5:49 pm
Location: North Somerset

Post by adam2 »

For off grid homes, or for standby use in grid connected homes, I would agree that lead acid batteries likely to be preferable.
Relatively cheap.
Relatively safe.
Sold everywhere and batteries of different brands are interchangeable.
Familiar technology.
A system intended for a deep cycle lead acid battery, can in an emergency use a vehicle battery. NOT the optimum choice but useful in an emergency.

For utility scale battery storage, it does not much matter to me what technology is used. Such facilities cost many millions of pounds, and those responsible will choose the technology that best meets their needs.
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
User avatar
Mark
Posts: 1389
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:48 am
Location: NW England

Post by Mark »

biffvernon wrote:Will Peabody, the world's largest coal-miner, go bankrupt? http://grist.org/business-technology/wo ... y-go-bust/
Coal miner Peabody Energy sinks to Q2'20 loss of $1.54B:
https://www.spglobal.com/marketintellig ... b-59770159

Bankruptcy can't be far off ?
User avatar
BritDownUnder
Posts: 880
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 12:02 pm
Location: Hunter Valley, NSW, Australia

Post by BritDownUnder »

Mark wrote:
biffvernon wrote:Will Peabody, the world's largest coal-miner, go bankrupt? http://grist.org/business-technology/wo ... y-go-bust/
Coal miner Peabody Energy sinks to Q2'20 loss of $1.54B:
https://www.spglobal.com/marketintellig ... b-59770159

Bankruptcy can't be far off ?
I had some Peabody shares once and as far as I am concerned they have already gone bankrupt once already. I think technically it was Chapter 11 so they dissolve all their shares and carry on after a 'bailout'.

Peabody used to own coal mines in Australia but have sold up reflecting a more general trend whereby mines formerly owned by blue chip miners such as Rio Tinto, Glencore and BHP are being sold, or more correctly given away for a dollar, to smaller companies and Chinese companies. In Australia, coal mines are supposed to pay into a fund held by the state to remediate the mine at the end of its life. There have been worries that smaller and Chinese owned mines are now not doing this and there will come a day when the owners will simply 'run off' leaving the state with the remediation costs. I don't think this time is close in Australia but I think it is about 5 to 10 years away.
G'Day cobber!
Post Reply