Sure, but it’s not going to provide base load energy.
You mean it’s not enough.
I mean thunder storm only happens once in a while, it’s hard to predict where lightning would strike, and even if we managed to capture a lot of energy, we don’t have the battery technology to store it.
I highly doubt it unless cloud seeding tech evolves so much so that we can also control cloud friction and strike points.
Maybe developing solar, wind, thermal, tidal, hydro etc would be more productive to take some pie slices away from coal?
1 Like
You need a big ones, like in GW scale, to replace conventional ones (coal, oil, gas).
Think like, nukes, hydroelectric (large dam/reservoir kind).
Most renewables are smaller scale, in MW scale, larger wind, solar, biomass, hydro (tidal, wave, etc.), geothermal, waste-to-energy burner.
Or even in kW scale, like rooftop solar panel, small wind.
The ratio is giga: mega: kilo = 1 million : 1 thousand : 1.
I think right now, nukes only has fission kind. (Using uranium). No actual utility scale fusion (using hydrogen).
Well sure, scale is the idea. cover the thousands square km of flat open rooftops in solar and you got some scale. No one is saying things are that black and white. the idea is taking slices of the pie. reducing coal by 1% with hydro would be fantastic. far more fantastic than doing nothing. As is making solar panels cleaner and more efficient and slapping them onto of everything and waiting them into the grid rather than battery banks. Same with wind, geo, tidal and all the other interesting ideas.
I realise Taiwan isnt the absolute best for hydro. but just as an example, British Columbia is something like 95% hydro electric for its grid electricity. Some fossil fuel, no nuclear. Aside from some people pissed about land rights around dams, and some animal spawning gets right fucked, it seems about as good as one can get with current options as far as safety and risk are concerned.
I hope for a day people stop thinking in terms of massive single energy plants, and fragment it all over the country. Still large, but localized. it also creates a safer buffer should an accident happen.
‘Cheap, high capacity, and fast: New aluminum battery tech promises it all’
I am all for it and developing energy storage. everyone is. the nice thing with solar fields on buildings is they can get wired into a battery bank at a future time with ease.
I only mentioned it because the anti solar crowd often brings up how dirty batteries are, and they are right. so we dont need them. and once a new better tech arises, plug em in 
are these the ones you’re talking about?
Battery tech. Currently in Lithium.
With possible Vanadium for near future.
I know Va already in commercial phase.
Not sure about Aluminium.
1 Like
Large Hydroelectric will have its peril. Environmental damage to water ecosystem due to dam building, for one. Some fish that have migration instinct embedded on their shoulder likely will be extinct. Think salmons.
Now, some “environmental expert” complain about wind turbine as bird-killing machine. Imagine how the reaction when you run out of freshwater fish.
Also, Taiwan river not good for dam. Unlike China for example.
Or, be like Singapore, plug your grid to neighbor and pay them up for the juice flowing. That way your electricity have zero emission.
Nothing will have zero impact. Coal, oil, gas, we gonna run out of them at some point. Not to mention pollution and the fact you need to import them.
1 Like
yes, those points noted and already mentioned. blocking a hand ful of waterways isnt making salmon extinct. it’s not perfect. but let’s just say that is preferable to nuclear disaster, fossil pollution, massive mining operations etc. I haven’t see a better option than hydro (where geography and climate allow).
Taiwan doesnt have the plug into a neighbours grid option like Singapore lol.
Give it 5-10 years.
How do these compare to the semi-solid state batteries (energy density of 360 Wh/kg) coming out this year?
I think I found something…
Up to 1,060 Wh/kg so far (still on the low end of possibilities), charging 70x faster and no performance lose with thousand of cycles.
That’s a huge jump in tech.
I think that’s the big thing. things are developing. fossil fuels have had loads of years in full swing already.
Today, renewables can be used, without battery tech and be plugged in to them when they get decent down the road. Doesnt seem so bad in my opinion.
Article projects that in 2025, the offshore wind installed capacity will be ~18.6% of current average consumption (~30GW)
Perhaps they can close the worst coal plant assuming there will be enough storage.
For offshore wind turbines, Taiwan aims to reach cumulative total installation capacity of 5.6GW in 2025 and 20.6GW in 2035.
1 Like
Absolutely. However the advantage with certain fuels like coal/fossil fuels, nuclear, hydro etc is they can be “turned on”. Unlike sun and wind. It would seem logical to milk the sun and wind for all it’s worth, but keep the dirty/risky/poorly planned ones for standby and make up. It seems logical to keep everything around for the just in case, until the better cleaner technologies are developed further and more solid.
Decommissioning old tech at the onset of new tech implementation seems silly. decommissioning it once the new stuff has graduated to standard fare would be more preferable. the only worry is that the population gets more silly and and sticks with dirty combustion because it’s easy and raging on the new tech because it isnt 100% yet in its infancy. this is a huge problem we see everywhere. even in discussions here.
Strangely no one talks, in an official level, about energy wastage here. Which is, to put it as politely as possible, disgusting! I would love to see a politician here mention that we cant see the nearby mountains because we air condition the open streets on the regular…
Was explaining to my class this week how they would have a really hard time cooking noodles or rice for dinner using solar or wind. 75% of the class uses natgas for cooking at home. I went beyond this and explained how all of the food they eat gets transported to Taipei. Wind and solar are not going to bring many food carrying trucks into Taipei. I explained that much of their food is preserved long enough for them to consume because of processing and refrigeration.
So much is taken for granted
Absolutely. However the advantage with certain fuels like coal/fossil fuels, nuclear, hydro etc is they can be “turned on”.
I think once they hit several GW of wind power they will need to implement smart grid solutions to absorb the peaks and fill the valleys: load shifting, virtual power plant etc
TSMC (which contracted large chunk of wind power) can afford to buy Tesla Megapacks
Ørsted was also awarded the right to build the 920 MW Greater Changhua 2b and 4 offshore wind farm and has signed a power purchase agreement with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (TSMC).
1 Like
Again with this thinking. Doesn’t matter that they could afford it. That is still money that could have been put to better use.