Does this entail moving LA? Because if it does, I’m skeptical. But if these land usage ideas are compatible with a modem city still being there, it could work.

I liked the implied history from the underwater landmarks and human structures.

That’s what 1c means. If it were designed to provide 25GW but only lasted 1hr, then it’d be 25c.

They’re equal if they’re running at a 1c discharge rate. Lfp, which are stable and good for safety, can have higher discharge rates of 5c up to 25c. Which would mean the capacity would be much less. To compare apples to apples, it’d be much better if they gave both the GW and GWh numbers.

Energy capacity is in kWh, discharge capacity would be in W.

Yeah I think so

Based on some numbers I looked up a couple of years ago:

LiPo 15¢/Wh

Flywheel 15¢/Wh

Compressed air 12¢/Wh

Pumped hydro 11¢/Wh

I’ll try to dig up the sources when I get home, but the cost advantage isn’t too large, so digging your own reservoirs would put it as more expensive.

That’s really really expensive unless you already have natural upper and lower reservoirs.

The alternative for base load is batteries, not wind and solar renewables, since they are intermittent. We don’t have a good idea yet of just how expensive massive grid storage is yet, but the lead time would definitely be shorter.

LEVs — including e-bikes, e-scooters, and e-mopeds

Seem to be EV transportation smaller than cars. Makes sense they could produce those batteries, they would use many times fewer batteries than cars.

But also, 8GW would be the nameplate capacity, (maximum power) you will get maybe a third of that on average depending on clouds, season, and time of day/night.

Yeah cool thanks. I’ll load that into the template box at width=100 x=100 y=150

Cool. Could you link just the picture, I’m having trouble using the link.

Is it supposed to be grey? That seems a bit bland

Those would be some of the side effects. But I could definitely also be remembering wrong too.

One of the ideas is reflecting more light into space by making it permintely overcast, right? Seed clouds high in the atmosphere. That one is really drastic, and might not even lower temperatures. Lowering carbon emissions is less expensive and has fewer side effects than alternatives. But we might need to still do those if we shoot way past climate targets before we cut our emissions.

Because of thermal efficiency of combustion cycles? Turbines are only like 30% to 40% efficient largely because of thermodynamics.

Cool. I guess I was thinking in the US. Globally is still getting more

The trend line looks good though, we’ve been mostly maxed out on hydropower for decades.

Is this installed capacity, or actual power output? If installed capacity, you’ll need a lot more than 100% since that’s just the nameplate max capacity, not the average. I’m glad we’ve gotten this far, but we still need to transition to 100% or more very soon.