at 7:05 they are Dlouhé stráně

...but these people want safe and green electricity...

@@joellebandan5244 wdym?

Yep we have same thing in Slovakia for 40 or 50 years, called Čierny Vah , also in natural reservation with beautiful views all around.

great but energy storage will depend on a steady production of excess energy from green sources (mainly solar and wind...) it also comes with an additional energy cost/waste.

@@rimshot6444 Not steady excess, but at least regular excess. Or even nuclear, as that delivers a very constant power, but demand is fluctuating over the day. That's what France does with hydro storage.

That's a lot of research work, filming, editting, etc. Will you pay him extra to do all this work?

We need more distributed (local) storage and solar generation

No he shouldn't cuz it's b*******. The vast majority of climate change is driven by all the erupting volcanoes around the world. Humans have very little to do with climate change. Don't believe me do some real research. Stop listening to people that are paid to tell you.

Our alternative is letting go of the struggle to keep California from burning down, drying up, and blowing away. We are going to have to prioritize the money.

@@aluisious California power problem is man made. They have not had new power plant, hydro, nuclear, etc.. in past 40 years despite the population doubled.

Just like solar panels installed on the rooftop of residential and commercial properties (i.e. there are long-term costs for repairs and maintenance). 🌞🏠🏣

Yes because nobody was able to do it and the one person who could was in so much demand that he could charge what he wanted. But what did it cost to build it, in today's dollars? And what part costs the most? And what's the cheapest it could cost? There are many people looking for work... what is missing? The initiative. New facilities are built daily... how can they make it? SpaceX exists because they did not accept what things cost, and started from the raw ore costs and worked their way up and eliminated all the bottlenecks.

@@Mindcroscope thats the catch, Solar panel in general doesn't require maintenance or negligible amount of maintenance cause there is no moving parts 🙂(just clean the panel with a hose pipe)

If only Switzerland could export mountains.

@@jimvj5897 Switzerland can export electricity. Switzerland exported over 30,000,000 megawatt (MW) hours in 2020. Long-distance electricity transmission is significantly more efficient than most people realize.

You're not worried about killing the natural fisheries? Shame!

@@sw8741 You're not worried about killing the unloved electrons? Shame!

Hello fellow swiss person! Ja ich finds au no cool das mir so viel wasserkraftwerk händ, und es macht mich stolz druf än schwitzer z si ;)

all of them african

@@bogdan1213 racist

Of all races and ethnicities. We're all humans after all :)

crypto trading is the future of all investment , text me on what app and make money daily from an organize copy trading strategy signal pattern

And Kudos to those brave public servants who bring forth the motion to vote on these projects.

The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 🌳

I personally think they should layer sheets of iron instead, inserted between sheets of graphene. Graphene is made of Carbon which is also very abundant. The lattices of graphene shouldn't interact with the Iron oxidation and would help to provide a gap between iron sheets increasing its exposed surface per weight.

@@Supremax67 I think it is a goal of theirs to remove all carbon sources from the process though, which may have influenced their decision to steer away from the graphene solution. I may be mistaken on their wishes though. The video talked about a couple different companies.

The Huge, Weird Batteries of the Future 0722am 5.8.22 CAN YOU DERIVE ENERGY FROM MAGNETS OR MAGNETIZED ROCK ETC ETC ETC?

crypto trading is the future of all investment , text me on what app and make money daily from an organize copy trading strategy signal pattern

Germany's overdose of renewable energy article

@@codaalive5076 !

@@JJONNYREPP FROM MAGNETIC FIELD, THIS WAS JUST DISCOVERED. nikola tesla. elon musk. bill gates-. = Alvin M. Weinberg's MSRE!

assumably, like nickel and lithium batteries had once been.

There are always practical matters. The rust takes up a larger volume than the iron, so there's a terrible problem with the electrodes growing and shrinking, and gradually falling apart. The same problem is one of the limits on lifespan for lead-acid batteries.

and apparently causes the women that work on it to lose their hair

Like electrolysis

Volcano has molten (or melted) iron. May be battery researchers should look into the possibility of making a series of giant "Iron-air Batteries" of a dormant volcano (i.e. a volcano that has erupted in the past but is unlikely to erupt soon). 👀🌋

crypto trading is the future of all investment , text me on what app and make money daily from an organize copy trading strategy signal pattern

You don't need a salt to split water with electricity to produce hydrogen and oxygen. There are processes and catalysts that claim to accelerate electrolysis like alkaline hydrolysis, but it takes energy to maintain the high temperatures these require, which in China comes from burning coal. Example: "This article concerns the low-cost and green electrolytic production of hydrogen operating at such a low voltage performed by the dissolution of steam in high temperature molten salt electrolytes"

The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 🌳

We need to stop building in flood prone areas.

The Huge, Weird Batteries of the Future 0733am 5.8.22 how carcinogenic is the clean energy working environment for those working in such an environment...?

Kollkl

@@jghall00 lolol like llllllll

😆

not sure if it would be cost effective, but it may work together with offshore windfarming and coastal desalination plants.

"reasonable" if you don't insider the construction time (during which the "dirty" generation remains) the construction cost ("billion dollar projects") and the declining number of sites available.

In Norway and other places with natural reservoirs, pumped hydro is a no brainer. We just have to build up a lot of wind farms.

@@la7dfa wasn't norway and germany doing an offshore windfarm project together?

Except the guy literally said that the geography is the problem, unless you are thinking in transporting thousands of tons of water and literally creating artificial mountains. Then I don't think its economically viable anymore.

The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 🌳

crypto trading is the future of all investment , text me on what app and make money daily from an organize copy trading strategy signal pattern

Wow

Nobody is going to buy Ambri's battery because it needs to be maintained at 450 degrees centigrade or so in order to function. It's a non starter.

@Daniel Meyers Nobody wants a battery that has to be kept heated at that temperature. It's an absurd idea that would be rejected within a minute in any board room.

@Daniel Meyers Interesting, so which company is currently using the batteries?

Climate-Anxiety; do you suffer from it?

Seems like a gigantic scam to me. They've raised 300 million dollars another 700 million then they will call it quits. 😅

@@itsourlife it's not a scam, it just faces engineering challenges to scale up (like every novel process). Those cost $millions in R&D to overcome, and the company may run out of money before it demonstrates it can solve them affordably.

@@skierpage There's an art of making money without having to ever sell anything really. This is what it really is. Come back few years later when the company has shut down.

The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 🌳

Energy consumption of phones has also increased a lot.

Not so true, you have now a computer that is more powerful than most computers 10 20 years ago in the palm of your hand.

@@danielvilliers612 exactly

@@danielvilliers612 true, that is more due to miniaturization of chips based on Moore's law. Also has it improved or radically changed people's lives like the refrigerator did? How many normal people can really afford such a computer and have use for it. We had heard of some battery development that had been done in MIT or some such institution that would radically improve battery life of small devices. Mobiles would need to be charged just once a week or so. But, years later nothing is in production.

That's because the better batteries were used in another way: To make the phones smaller and lighter. You could easily have a phone that would last a week, but no-one is going to buy that because it would be the size of a 90s phone - and uncomfortable bulge in the pocket. Customers demanded their phones be smaller, lighter, and thinner - and that is what they got, by reducing the size of the battery while maintaining the target of a once-per-day charge.

"Cheapest" 😅. Go tell the economists behind Lazard's Levelized Cost of Electricity report that they're wrong. New nuclear is 3-5 times more expensive than wind or solar per MWh, and takes 15 years. That's why wind and solar are the majority of new generation in the USA and globally, and why no utility will build a new nuclear plant using current-gen technology. Maybe one or more of the next-generation liquid modular fluorine salt thorium blahblah small reactors will prove to be cheap and quick to build, after another 10 years and $10 billion of research and development...

@@skierpage Ok a couple things. When government subsidizes wind and solar, rejects several oil drilling permits and increases nuclear regulations you are going to have skewed numbers. Spain did that and crashed their economy. Germany is now doing the same causing their citizens to pay almost double in their energy usage. Texas had a black out for several weeks because their wind turbine froze and had No energy backups. Why is China building more nuclear power plants on their land but selling their solar and wind products to the US? Why are celebrities pushing for green energy while flying in their private jets causing more emissions? Providing public Wind and solar to a country is nothing but a gimmick.

say whaaaaaaaaaat? a corporative video trying to sell something we already knew about as a new technology??? COMPANIES LYING TO US?? nahhhh, it cant be!!! /s

Yup! All, completely, 100% solved, forever. Great job everyone! Really, ZERO problems left for the world. We did it! All of that is sarcasm, because of your dumb statement.

The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 🌳

SMR is going to be a huge part. Every time people start talking about nuclear and climate change they start getting all excited about fusion, which has never been demonstrated to yield excess energy outside of a bomb. We've got to get real honest about what we have the tech to do in 5 years.

I was told once that when nuclear energy was first worked on. The scientists figured out that micro units were the most stable and sustainable.

Germany's overdose of renewable energy article

All of the companies developing liquid molten sodium thorium small salt modular reactor blah blah blah designs are 10 years and 10 billion dollars away from demonstrating that their small reactors actually will be cheaper per MWh and quicker to build than current nuclear generation. It's definitely worth researching, and I hope some of them actually deliver, but they're all irrelevant to the rapid decarbonization we need to achieve in the next decade. The absurd delays and enormous cost overruns of the few nuclear plants under construction aren't "bad press," they're facts.

@@skierpage Who is mentioning small modular reactors except Gates and others who are dangerous with their explosive coolant. Your knowledge is very shallow, when writing about renewables infrastructure cost has to be mentioned, otherwise it makes no sense. Nothing about this make much sense. Get your facts straight; USA had molten salt reactor running in 60's, results were great but funds cut because of oil lobby. As i'm writing this another plant MSR with Th fuel is running in China, their plan is to make all ele. this way by 2050. They will succeed. Russia has lots of knowledge about MSR too, unfortunately they don't get the same chances as other, despite urgency to move on! South Korea just made several reactors for UAE for 7 billions in 7 years, since there are several at the same site other will be put online later. Chins is also capable of doing it but they rather focus on their needs. Things in UAE are going according to plans because they don't allow corruption we have here in EU and US. SMRs (not MSRs, very different) are similar to those battery plants, very expensive and make no sense when we can resolve the problem with normal nuclear fission reactors of 3rd+ Gen. You are right in saying it is worth researching this things, although burning fossil fuels and using batteries make no sense. They only do it because government pays for it. I hope rest of the world doesn't need the same lection Germany just had, here ya go again: "Germany's overdose of renewable energy" article.

No it's not. The majority of new generation is wind and solar because they're cheap and quick. No private utility will build a current-generation nuclear plant that takes 15 years and $15 billion. And it will take 15 years and $15 billion for each of the next-generation liquid sodium molten fluoride small thorium modular blah blah nuclear reactor designs to prove whether it actually will be cheaper per MWh and quicker; they're worth R&D for future decarbonization, but they're irrelevant to achieving the rapid reduction in fossil fuel burning we need this decade. The economic case for nuclear is even worse now than it was a decade ago, in the face of renewable electricity that is intermittently dirt cheap.

The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 🌳

The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 🌳

The main strategy for a grid with high amount of renewable energy is to create better grid connections over a larger area. There's never zero wind and solar over a large area. Yes, overproducing is what we'll have to do, so that the minimum output satisfies our baseload need. But in a future where we've solved climate change we are going to have a LOT of flexible load to accept the "excess". That's almost true by definition. We're electrifying all the things that used fuels, i.e. the thing where we needed flexible, portable energy. Battery electric cars and hydrogen or ammonia trucks/ships/planes will represent a massive amount of flexible load. Hydrogen production in particular, which we also need for steel and fertilizers. Electrolysis plants are relatively cheap, and hydrogen can be stored. We can even feed hydrogen back to the grid if we really need to. Batteries will mainly serve to smooth things out more, stabilize the frequency and maximize the value we get out of renewable energy. Seasonal variations up north is best handled by burning trash. Yes. Reuse, reduce, recycle first. But eventually everything turns into low grade trash, and it's best in the end to burn it and filter out all the pollutants we've injected into so much of what we make. Could be combined with CCS to make it net carbon negative too.

@@auspiciouslywild If I understand this correctly your argument rests on a statement/assumption you made at the beginning: "There's never zero wind and solar over a large area" Two things about that. One, it is factually incorrect. Large power generation deficits can occur over large areas over extended periods of time. To name two examples, Europe as a whole experienced significantly reduced Wind energy production during the last year, and during hurricane seasons, significantly large portions of countries like the united states will be cut of from both wind and solar energy production for weeks at a time. If situations like the above should coincide with significant temporary loss of power generation in other parts of the country, which is bound to happen frequently, then the country in question would have a problem. Two, your premise would require flexible long distance transportation of electricty. That is not really something we want to do, either because of the losses in energy it will result in, or the need for specialized infrastructure to prevent these losses. To achieve the latter across a country like the US, you would need a secondary power grid in addition to the existing one, simply for the long range lossless transport of electricity. Both of these options are enormously expensive, thus making electricity generation more expensive. Not that you seem to have a problem with expensive energy, or you would not have mentioned Hydrogen. 30 Percent efficiency in the hydrogen cycle means three times the energy production, and thus three times the energy price.

@@Alexander_Kale very true look how droughts have disabled hydropower over large areas, not to mention loss of cooling water limits all other forms of thermal electric power generation (steam turbines), so that affects the obvious carbon oxidation but also the less obvious nuclear as is currently affecting France. Grids over large areas, especially east- west orientation extends the solar day, many countries like Australia China USA and Europe can gain from this about 3 hours. Grids like this are built in China over 3000kms running at a million volts DC. It’s just the West hasn’t got the same long term planning ability, with their short popularity elected government terms.

@@williamgoode9114 Cooling cycles do not absolutely require water to function. True, a lot of them NOWADAYS are build that way, but you can absolutely create air coolers for steam turbine coolant. Matter of fact, in places with water scarcity, this is already being done. The reason we normally don't is because we so far didn't have to content with water scarcity of any meaningful severity. Second, the same issue of long distance high volume electricity transfer applies no matter were you do it, be that in the US or in CHina. if the chinese really want to shuffle large amounts of electricity around their country like this, then this would be just as moronic there as if done in the West. Finnaly, if given the choice between living in a struggling democracy and a totalitarian state like China, I would choose the democracy ten times out of ten. At least in the former, I don't suddenly disappear when I point out the problems...

@@auspiciouslywild I agree with you, I don’t think the OP recognizes this will be part of a varsity of sources and stores of energy, not just this. Also we still need to continue developing this type of sustainable technology, we’ve barely started! we wasted a lot of time, while giving oil companies endless handouts and passes after making the ocean light on fire and destroying ecosystems.

Solar and wind *are* reliable. What is your point?

@@sudosu4133 Please tell me how a solar panel is reliable in winter when it's cloudy for weeks on end, or how wind panels are reliable when there is no little to no wind.

@@rikkertbatzback1816 First of all: You are changing your assertion. Please re-read your reply. You do not mention "solar panels" but "solar and wind power". Solar and wind power are very reliable. The power wind and solar devices can generate depends on the intensity of the wind and solar radiation. The intensity is variable and intermittent, but the reliability of the device generating that power depends on the reliability of the device itself, not on the energy source (wind or solar). Solar panels are very reliable converting solar radiation (sunlight) into energy and so are wind generators. The power they generate varies because the intensity of the sources is intermittent, not because the sources, or the wind or solar devices , are unreliable.

What I guess you wanted to say is that wind and solar intensity is variable while your energy consumption is much less so. This is precisely why we need energy storage, which is what this excellent video is all about. You obviously failed to understand that.

They're reliably unreliable- or put in another way, intermittently productive in a predictable way. They're perfectly reliable in terms of performance to spec.

and they exist in Switzerland since 1907, batteries of the "future"

Taum Sauk Reservoir

And remember when that failed!!!

Arizona too

A drip irrigation below the compost pile with occasional application of water and small amount of continuous air flow would be worth considering to accelerate composting process if that is the objective.

@@robertrogers6830informative response thank you. Something you may find interesting along this line, Robert. My chat with a famous Utuber, Hehe. That’s not all, Growing ur greens, John. Modern science agree’s. Our trash can be turned into High biodiversity Compost. High biodiversity Compost must be kept alive and moist. After only 30 mins oxygen levels in an unaerated compost pile will have dropped and the anaerobic bacteria emerge. Only living aerated static made type composts have large enough amounts of required biodiversity including: Nematodes, fungi, and anthropoids to name a few. In order to have a regenerative restart on most of our depleted American/worlds farmland soils and help insure National/world future food recourse. It’s Composts that will secure our food, not just money. 70% of Americans waist is compostable.

@@robertrogers6830 My chat with a famous Utuber. Hehe That’s not all, Growing your greens, John. Modern science agrees, our trash can be turned into High biodiversity Compost. High biodiversity Compost must be kept alive and moist. After only 30 mins, oxygen levels in an unaerated compost pile will have dropped and the anaerobic bacteria emerge. Only living aerated static made type composts have large enough amounts of required biodiversity including: Nematodes, fungi, and anthropoids to name a few. To have a regenerative restart on most of our depleted American/world's farmland soils and help insure National/world future food recourses. It’s Composts that will secure our food, not just money. 70% of Americans waste is compostable. So make a pile and donate it to your farmer today!

If you like spending 15 years and $15 billion to build a single plant. There's a reason cheap and quick wind and solar are the majority of new generation in the USA and globally.

Could it be because of $$$...???

Yeah its the most sustainable source of energy we have that can also be deployed pretty much anywhere

How exactly are you storing energy in the tanker? If you're liquefying green hydrogen, the ship is very expensive and it's going to sail away to sell the hydrogen to Japan for its hydrogen economy™ boondoggle. Most plans for hydrogen energy storage call for storing it in underground salt caverns. A huge battery energy storage system does not take up a lot of space,; the problem is the cost of a GWh of batteries.

That’s all energy storage else it would provide you infinite energy.

Both wrong. It is great for dealing with peaks in demand for electricity, but it really depends on what electricity you use to pump the water up to the upper reservoir. If you limit the electricity to being the excess electricity being produced by renewable sources such as solar and wind, you add to the net generating capacity of all generators in the power grid, and you can consume that electricity when, the renewable sources are not available, such as night time when some solar is not available. If you don't restrict it to excess renewable electricity, then the system's sole purpose is to help cope with peaks in demand, and the overall effect is there is a loss in electrical energy, caused by loses in the system where the kWh generated is less than the kWh used to pump the water up to the upper reservoir

@@deang5622 Please. Whatever source is used to charge a pumped storage project, solar-nuclear-gas, on discharge less comes back out again, as with *any* storage mechanism. Some charging sources may or may not be prone to excess at night like nuclear, but that doesn't change the loss. And, if economics is the topic w PHS projects, intermittent sources are a poor choice. PHS works best when charged every day of the year, typically at night when demand is lowest, and discharged during peak demand.

@@Nill757 I think you have failed to understand the key point of my post. Firstly, there is no need to articulate further about the losses in your response as I comprehensively covered that topic. And nothing I said was factually incorrect in respect of that, so I see no merit in regurgitating it back in a response. The key point is that there are two ways to use a pumped storage system: 1. To cope with peaks in demand and provide temporary extra generation capacity when that power is needed. This does not add to the total net generation capacity in the network. Or 2. To add to the total net generation capacity. But this does NOT happen if you are using electricity from coal, gas, nuclear to pump the water up from the lower reservoir to the higher reservoir. So the idea here is, that energy from solar and wind generation stations is used to pump the water up, and you are then capturing the energy from the renewables and making it available when it wouldn't normally be available, and thereby overcoming the big problem with renewables. The problem with renewables is that the available of the power is not guaranteed 24/7 so you need a base level of generation capacity which can meet the demand need, so storing the energy from renewables can reduce the base generation capacity that is needed from non renewables

I agree

I feel like at this point they’re ignoring it on purpose. How else are we supposed to advance other forms of technology if we settle.

If only it weren't so expensive. LCOE is quite a bit higher.

@@tbhbananas9922 Biggest problem with nuclear is starting costs, then tear down costs. Nobody ants to deal with the teardown and getting rid of the waste . It has to be a government driven thing, private industry sees it as too many hurdles for what they make for profits

SMRs are going to be part of the equation.

It would be very, very tiny. A fraction of a percent, insignificant compared to other inefficiencies in the process. Water evaporation rate depends mostly on the surface area of the water, and will be a certain depth per day depending on air humidity, temperature, etc. Apparently pools lose about 1/4 inch of water per day. A useful pumped storage facility would probably see turnover thousands of times higher than this. You'd be more worried about the cost of building it, the cost of the turbines and pumps and the cost of maintaining them, and also the efficiency of the turbines.

Due to the cycles typically being Daily 24hrs pump up and down. Water evaporation during that time is very tiny. But yes if you left it up there for a few months just leaking and evap would waste a large fraction of your water/ energy potential.

Evaporative losses depend on surface area as you say but also on the weather. Wind velocity, temperature (a big one), and humidity. I agree that such losses would be minuscule though.

@@edwardcoulter9361 Yeah, I was tired and didn't feel like working out a realistic number based on the formulas when I posted that.

Great point! But wouldn't rain them Add to the efficiency?

You say the controls are a bit more sophisticated, but in reality those controls serve only to get optimal use out of wind power to overcome its shortcomings and limitations, which are actually not present for gas.

They also have a short lifespan

@@timgibson3754 Lifespan is based on manufacturer, design, implementation, operating conditions, care of maintenance. They can be designed for long term use, and some are. However you need to consider it's still relatively early in the development of wind harvesting. Expect significant improvements in cost, reliability, production output and flexibility. Lots of design options exist for cheaper storage as well, just lifting water back into a hydro storage(dam) with available wind offer's huge potential. Especially in colder/wetter/windier climates. Most current wind harvesting uses moving parts, but even that is not required. Clever people are spraying ions into the air and then capturing the energy from the wind as the ions flow past a sensor plate. Don't be so easily fooled by press that wants to dumb you down...

I’d like the answers to those questions also. Waiting for thunderf00t debunk video 😉

Well, the thing to notice is that he said this was originally used in conjunction with a nuclear power plant. In a nuclear power application it makes sense since the nuclear plant is always generating power so you just use some it. However, to use this system as is being suggested, a lot of power would have to be spent and the claim is that wind and solar will provide it. I think that is a bit of a stretch. That is also considering that this place already existed and is being repurposed. To build such a facility from scratch would take an enormous amount of energy and all of that cost would have to be recovered before it could claim to be self-sufficient. No word on the environmental impact of all the mining necessary to hollow out mountains or to build artificial mountains for this purpose.

Pumped hydro is usually greater than 80% efficient.

80% over short term

they pump at night when energy usage is lowest.

That was a comment for Americans. I had the largely same experience as you in the UK, and then I moved to the USA 23 years ago and experienced brownouts.

So what you're saying is that you live in a civilized country. ;-)

Let's hope that lasts. I get the feeling that Germany is going to have all sorts of energy issues over the next year or two.

@@gpsfinancial6988 nah why should it. The european grid is really interconnected and our neighbors France and danmark produce more energy then they need

@@CaptivaLP France is an importer now. They have not looked after their nuclear assets and are paying the price.

Yes.

The first batteries were glass jars storing static electricity.

Yes, but if you have excess energy it's better than wasting that energy away. There are always lithium batteries but those are also expensive, you need to replace those from time to time and they have other disadvantages as well, while a water battery will work for a lot longer and comes with a few other perks, like having a clean water reservoir at your disposal.

Yeah, that's what a battery is. There is no escaping the laws of thermodynamics

Hydrogen is hard to transport. The atoms are so small that they escape through the walls of the piping. You will need allot of very expansive piping.

„Per gram“, yes. But hydrogen‘s problem is „per volume“.

@@horsthotzenplotz3321 they want to store spent co2 underground, they could just as well store hydrogen underground then get it out when its needed, natural gas style. zThat way natural gas technology can be used for green purposes, sam,e tech, different gas.

@@ghffrsfygdhfjkjiysdz thats why we need a lot of cheap energy, thus, fusion

There are lots of plans to build such offshore hydrogen generation plants, but you could also just send the generally-useful electricity to shore over a cable. Making the inefficient detour through hydrogen has to be worth doing over electrifying the process, which eliminates hydrogen for land transportation and home heating. The world will need megatonnes of green hydrogen, requiring a TW of renewable electricity, but it will be dwarfed by the rest of the renewable electricity market.

And destabilise weather/water currents, great way to f% up the environment and micro climates!

@@XFDADX Hungry people don't care about environment or climate, and with the artificial famine coming soon, there will be lots of hungry ones. Also, greening the useless dry regions helps with carbon sequestering.

@@KiaAzad don't worry about that they'll only get more famine 🤌

@@XFDADX Well, I'm on the side of not letting people suffer if we can do something about it.

@@KiaAzad Everyone is on the side of not letting people suffer (because we are an endangered species after all) doing exactly what causes more suffering 🤌

They did say cost for these are billion dollar project. I did not hear efficiency, was looking for that one too

So they dessalinize first and then re mineralize in those mountains

WHOAH NOW! Don`t mess around with these woke leftists! You might cause more peaceful protests! We can`t afford anymore toxic smoke and PCPs in the air, water, and soil. They`ve already done enough environmental damage and sentenced millions to DNA damage and cancer!

What's "the cost to the earth"? The latest oil spill says "hi" . You think the materials Mined for fossil fuel vehicles are brought by the fairies? .

No slaves needed for LFP batteries.

They are no slaves who are mining this neither children only family who work together with thier children since in western world children don't help parents doesn't mean everywhere is same.

What this videos have to do with electric cars.and also normal gas powered cars are more horrible than electric the more longer you use them the worse they become.

Thunderfoot. That is all.

The gravity battery has substantial flaws that I would urge you to research

@@rexmann1984 Oh those poor poor concrete blocks, I'm pretty sure the blocks themselves shed tears when that video was uploaded.

When gravity can power planes and ships get back to me.

creative, but what is shown in this video is vastly different from that

@@isk8atparks yes I agree...but I had to add my 2 cents...not worried if someone takes my idea and does something with it...it's obvious to me i'm not going to do anything with my many ideas.. .too busy scratching and clawing to make ends meet

Batteries can be used anywhere, pumped storage, not so much.

@@buildmotosykletist1987 They were, but read the latest Lazard analysis: the unsubsidized levelized cost of electricity from wind and solar is now cheaper than any other form of new generation, and cheaper than continuing to operate a coal plant. They'll be the majority of new generation from here on out, even if and when tax credits for them go away. We should tax fossil fuels for the undeniable massive harms that burning them cause now and in the future, but politicians are allergic to the 'T' word so we get tax incentives and credits for better alternatives instead.

@@buildmotosykletist1987 You pay for energy, not power. What are their figures per kWh?

The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 🌳💖

You would flood a massive area of land for very little energy storage. Coastal cliffs are almost at sea level, they have very little gravitational potential energy. You ideally want your reservoir on top of a high mountain.

Gravity is an extremely weak force. Gravity storage is only worthwhile when nature supplies huge upper and lower storage areas (lakes or reservoirs) with a large height difference and a huge working mass (the Northfield pumped hydro in the video holds 20 million tonnes of water).

I live in switzerland and we already use this technology in several places. I think it is better than stationary lithium batteries. Less dangerous, toxic and cheaper in the long run

Switzerland has it since 1907, Luxembourg Vianden Pumped Storage Plant since 1959, Northfield was built in 1964

It is not cheap at all - it is VERY expensive. That is the problem.

The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 🌳

The problem is scaling up all these Earth friendly energy sources. If it was that easy and cheaper than current solutions, it would have been done a long time ago. Solar and wind while they may work for individuals, it's a relatively inefficient way to generate electricity on a large cost effective scale. Nuclear and the currently experimental fusion are the most efficient means of getting large amounts of energy as cheaply as possible.

@@BillAnt Thanks for the input, here in New Zealand Geothermal makes up to 20% of our energy needs. The line of thought you are on is part of the problem now if cost was taken out of the mix & countries didn't all have their own agenda's some of the sources you mention probably could have been a reality by now as we have a massive resource (Unless your in a landlocked country) in using tidal energy but everyone wants to be first in the race same as fusion tech the know how & theoretic's have been around for years its only now when we are on the precipice that actual movement like in Japan has started but global destruction & dwindling resources are a great motivator in the energies race. Funny thing NZ doesn't have any Nuclear energies & unlike some countries we also don't have regular electricity blackouts our grid is old but as the greener energies come on line we embrace & try to improve instead of being reliant on potentially nightmare tech.

​@@karlashdown5228 - Also can't compare the 5 million population of NZ with 330 of the US, itt is magnitudes higher requiring that much more energy.

@@BillAnt with the pay as you go healthcare of the US in 20-30 years there will only be a fraction of the population you have now, But it's quite sad that out of the hundreds of millions of people in that one country your people aren't doing more just consuming at a rate the planet can't keep up with in fact most countries even my own are doing the same however we have actual departments of government devoted to renewable energies something your oil lobbyists would stop in a heartbeat, But no country is perfect some just want to help its citizens & some don't exactly the same as the environment.

​@@karlashdown5228 - As they say, different strokes for different folks. lol

Yes....they could use old automobile and appliance sheet metal.

Pellets have convoluted surfaces and therefore much higher surface area than any smooth finished piece of iron...DUH!!

@@jmccoomber1659 spheres have the smallest surface area at any volume

It needs to maintain a matrix shape to allow the fluid flow. They choose the smallest pellet that wont completely rust and fail structurally.

Do you know a new information platform named " Ganjing World " was launched recently in NY? It is so so different from all the others, I'm trying now!

Three problems: 1. If all countries were to supply their energy need by fission, in 30 years there would be no more minable material. The required isotopes for fission are far from common or abundant. Together with the fact that a new reactor takes up to 10 years to build and Bilions and is the most expensive form of energy we can currently use, not feasible 2. Nuclear faces the same problem as renewables: nuclear reactors can't react to spikes or lows, they always produce the same output and changing the output amount takes weeks to take effect. 3. I want to see that thorium reactor. A physicist friend sometimes jokes about what will be finished first, Iter or a commercial thorium reactor able to use U233. By now there are just prototypes and countries like Norway are building their commercial version for two decades by now and spending tripple digit Billions. With Thorium reactors take too long to build to react to the current energy and climate crisis and they cost more than many countries earn in a year

@@fatalityin1 three counter arguments 1) that maybe true if you only use thermal reactors that derive their power from the fissioning of U235 which is only about 0.7% of the uranium in existence. Fast breeder reactors can utilize the much more plentiful U238 which accounts for the other 99.3% of uranium supply. We can power all of the world's energy needs from the worlds spent nuclear fuel for close to 70 years. Current reserves can carry us for literal millennium. 2) it's untrue that a reactor can't react to changing load, I myself have served on an aircraft carrier and we'd frequently alter reactor power answering various bells. I'm not saying all reactors can do this but it's possible. But outside of that there's many ways to even things out, just like with renewables. But I'd say it's a little more favorable for nuclear as it's heat can be used to drive useful chemical reactions directly. Reactions to make hydrogen, chemical fertilizer, synthetic aviation fuel, etc. Or it's heat can be stored directly for transients using molten salts as a medium. 3) fast breeder reactors can run on thorium as well. There are some fast breeders operational around the world today including one getting built in Wyoming in America. The don't run on thorium but they don't really need to since uranium is so plentiful, especially since they can run on "depleted" fuel from thermal reactors. But as I said before, the current reserves of uranium could power the world for over a thousand of years. This didn't include the billions of tons of uranium in the oceans but just includes what humanity had access to today (~10 million tons). I don't see any reason not to pursue thorium though as it has roughly the same energy density as uranium and it's more abundant giving us even more thousands of years of energy budget

@@zaurenstoates7306 To 1 and 3: you are naming numbers to all sources that are albeit plentifull either extremely ineconomic (filtering sea water would drive the price for nuclear power from currently 200$/MWh to around 500$/MWh) or simply infeasible (filtering earth's crust where 99% of U235 is located). To U238: 238 is used to min/max U235 rods longevity transforming U238 into U239. U238 can not realistically be used as sole fission material but is added at between 24%-30% to U235 rods. And finally, are you really comparing a nuclear boat with max 800MWh (most likely closer to 400 in day to day usage) to a modern commercial nuclear reactor with up to 6TWh output and saying that both can be as easily upscaled and downscaled? But that nuclear fission is very slow at adapting to energy needs is public news, if you don't believe me, a quick 2 seconds google search would give you the result. And maybe you want to talk about how nuclear is to most expensive form of energy creation? You ignored my point to that.

@@fatalityin1 Adding to your 3rd point, Molten Salt Reactors have been just around the corner for decades. As one wag put it: "X is the power source of the future, and always will be." Where X is fusion, MSR,... I don't mean to denigrate them, but endless hype doesn't help.

@@fatalityin1 Well said.