solar

[Anonymous No.8161817]

/g/ doesn't know shit about tecnology so i'll repost here

Electricfag here

>Solar energy.
We know the hardest thing with enery is how to store it, so since solar output is at it's peak during the day when demand is low and vice versa demand is high during night when no sun is up, why don't they use the exeeding electricity during the day to divide hydrogen and oxygen from water, store hydrogen and burn it back into water during night to produce energy?

Same quantity of oxygen is produced when extracting hydr. than you need to burn it back into water
No CO2 emission
Ofc no 100% efficiency but is still better than expensive big ass lithium battery in each house

Tell me why i'm an idiot /sci/

[Anonymous No.8161830]

nitrogen oxides get produced, which are toxic.

[Anonymous No.8161843]

That's it? The only reason?
I mean CO sure is toxic + a shitload of other nasty stuff gets produced when burning coal, but they come up with a way for filtering it

[Anonymous No.8161845]

>>8161843
Meant for>>8161830

[Anonymous No.8161871]

Well fuck me /sci/ is even less engaging.
My bad for not going directly to /b/ and using an actual board made for this kind of discussions

[Anonymous No.8161877]

>>8161871
/sci/ is a very slow board

[Anonymous No.8161886]

>>8161871
Poor little baby. You went to /sci/ with a stupid and well-understood idea, pretended it was new by omitting the words 'electrolysis' and "fuel cell", and got all fussy when you got treated like the idiot you already know you are.

[Anonymous No.8161903]

>>8161871
From your OP I can tell you aren't really worth the time it would take to explain in full detail why your questions are childishly naive which in itself means teaching you the basics of the energy industry -and thermo chemistry in general for that matter- would be largely inconsequential to society. I don't mean any of this offensively, just that questions it's better discussed on /b/, facebook etc. with your peers.

Here's an article for you to read while you delete this thread:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer%E2%80%93Tropsch_process

[Anonymous No.8161908]

>>8161903
Ouch. Hilarious.

[Anonymous No.8161917]

>>8161886
You double nigger i'm asking why don't they do that
I know electrolysis and shit just i'm not english so i tried to use less uncommon words wich translation i'm not sure of, to make OP more comprehensible

>>8161903
I have a better idea i'll go to sleep since i have an actual job, i don't want to waste your precious time worth litterally nothing because you're still in school at 25 and deep in debt

[Anonymous No.8161918]

>>8161917
my parents are paying for my education, they believe I'm worth it.
have fun at work tomorrow ~

[Anonymous No.8161924]

This board is made of pretentious uni students full of shit with no friends

Still no real response tho

[Anonymous No.8161927]

>>8161917
The fact you tried replying with vitriol shows you are rustled. Besides, you're probably just projecting fantasy, so that your truly depressing existence, seems just that iota less depressing than is reality.

[Anonymous No.8161933]

>>8161917
>>8161918
A double post too, hilarious.

[Anonymous No.8161936]

>>8161918
And this gives you the right to feel superior?
My parents are divorced and my mom cant afford uni
I got a job in my field of studies i'm happy as fuck and i'm travelling accross my country doing what i love and learning new shit

And you get your shit paid by daddy

I'll laugh in your face

[Anonymous No.8161938]

>>8161817
Some options.

1) Encourage non-renewable power providers to slow down production during daytime.
2) Adapting industry to run the power intense things during daytime.
3) Selling to neighbouring time-zones.
4) Storage in batteries.

1 and 2 could be done automatically by price incentives of buyer and seller on the market. At least in every area of industry where price of electricity is non negligble.

I really have no idea what the efficiency would be for these different alternatives. But my gut feeling would be that 1 and 2 would be easier to do. Weather reports to predict renewables output to feed non-renewable producers so they can prepare to fire up or slow down their own fuel burning.

[Anonymous No.8161941]

>>8161933
I'm >>8161917, didn't make >>8161918 you tard

[Anonymous No.8161943]

>>8161941
I connected the wrong post, I meant: (>>8161924)

[Anonymous No.8161970]

>>8161936
I thought you had to work tomorrow

[Anonymous No.8161979]

>>8161970
As I said, he was projecting fantasy to make his life seem less depressing (>>8161917 & >>8161927 & >>8161936).

[Anonymous No.8161983]

>>8161979
I'm not either of you guys, but there do unironically exist people who find employment more depressing than alternatives. None of the standard motivators in society to get an employment work on them which really is a shame because they often are quite skilled.

[Anonymous No.8162020]

>>8161817
The main current problem with solar is that it costs too much, it's not a large enough part of the grid that storage is an issue

It's cheaper to have natural gas plants that turn on when demand exceeds supply instead of storing energy

If you are storing energy in some way other than batteries, it's much more efficient to pump water up to a reservoir or compress air

[Anonymous No.8162039]

>>8162020
Solar power systems actually pays off after just 10-15 years, and that's as far north as Europe. On peak mid day sunny days it can produce some 50% of electricity in Germany and on average as much as 6% of the total electricity. If you gave those numbers to people back in the 80s or early 90s it would probably have been disregarded as unrealistic crazy hippie fantasies.

Yes you can regulate by steering the amount of fuel non-solar plants use. For example have water power plant save up some water in reservoirs day time and use it during night. Or have a fuel based plant slow down to save fuel during day time et.c.

[Anonymous No.8162064]

>>8161817
Because it takes more energy to break a water molecule than the energy that would be produced by burning the hydrogen.

[Anonymous No.8162078]

>>8162064
Yes no storage process is 100% efficient. That is why steps 1-3 of answer >>8161938 could sometimes be more efficient than bothering with storage if it could be avoided.

[Anonymous No.8162390]

>>8161817

I have a conjecture that gravity does not act as a force, only as an acceleration due to warping space time. You can only feel the force from trying to resist the acceleration of gravity.