this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Europe
8484 readers
1 users here now
News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures
Rules
(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)
- Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
- No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
- No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.
Also check out [email protected]
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Part of the reason this is even worth doing is that they already have the district heating infrastructure in place to pipe the hot water out to buildings to be used for heat. This storage system is basically an add-on to that infrastructure.
So if you have a city that already has such a hot water piping network in place and has nearby ~~natural caves~~ bedrock that can be easily accessed and used in this way, then the cost of implementation is low.
If you don't have the heat piping infrastructure then it's a heavy lift to retofit it into all the existing buildings. Doable, but it will take a lot of time and resources.
~~If you don't have the caves then this is just a non-starter.~~
*edit: So I got that wrong, they're apparently going to be digging (or blasting?) new holes into bedrock for the water storage. I guess you could do this anywhere where there was bedrock relatively close to ground level (I'm not a geologist, I assume it would depend somewhat on the type of rock).
I'm curious how they're going to make building-sized holes in the rock relatively cheaply. Typically every kind of earthmoving is expensive.
I understand. Here we do have heating undelivered by heating pipes. Heat comes from local energy plants.
We dont have caves though but storing heat underground should be doable i assume
It just feels silly to spend money on not making electricity instead of spending? Money on storing even just some of it in any kind of energy form.
My theory is that energy is still see as a resource instead of a flow. We won't run out of wind energy. We will only get more and more of it. We shouldn't care quite as much on how effectively we can convert or store it imo
It's not that, it's storing the excess energy and converting it to heat, and that heat is then transferred to homes and thus reducing the use of electricity in the winter. Most of the electricity usage of Finland is in heating during winter. So using excess to store heat is a great idea, and using existing infrastructure to boot.
Great!
So instead of paying money to turn off electricity generation when its cheapest, why not simply generate heat and store it in a similar way during those periods?