Oh I'm sure some rich bastards will find a way to ruin it.
this post was submitted on 11 May 2025
192 points (97.1% liked)
science
18822 readers
366 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
They're going to...pull a vacuum in a concrete sphere deep underwater. And then use the force of water being sucked back in to turn a turbine.
...sure.
I think I understand how the battery where they drop a big weight down a mountain works; how do these work? Or how does it compare in effectiveness as I assume it's probably the same principle?
It has a turbine inside it. It is not a cement ball, it is very misleading title. It's a cement shaped hollow orb with a hydro power generator inside it.
Well that sounds like cheating.
Sounds interesting, but considering how thick hydroelectric dams need to be to hold back a mere lake, how thick are these spheres going to be to hold back an entire ocean?
Wow, someone invented upside down pumped storage.
High social acceptability: Installed far from inhabited areas, these facilities arouse less opposition.
Actually, being very close to inhabited areas, but 0 impact, including nonsensical nuissance arguments, means short power transmission. It's also very easy to pair with offshore wind.
I would like to know what is the % of loss when storing power as any energy conversion is not lossless.
Regular pumped hydro has an overall efficiency of about 80%. I would guess these sphere things would be similar, assuming you can put them near a high-voltage line, since the underlying technology (pump and turbine) is the same.
Cheap storage is more important than conversion ratio. Enough renewables leads to periods of negative prices without matching storage capacity. Storage can mean 1-2c/kwh charging costs, and even 50% efficiency makes discharged power 2-4c/kwh.
if 0.5m thick sphere, 30m diameter is 1413 m^3 of concrete. $300k to $400k in materials. Stores 150mwh power. About $2-$3/kwh
view more: next ›