We take for granted that energy is produced day in day out, but the problem of distribution of energy into a given grid is big task, and therein another problem which is that the storage of energy could be neglected in so far as the ability of any one person were concerned, outside of computing devices or any technology which generally used electricity to a lesser capacity relative to much other living circumstances. On the other hand new technological inventions are proving potentially beneficial in terms of storing surplus energy where it could be especially useful, or in other words, harvesting stored energy, for instance, when demand cycles in the electric grid are higher means potential cost savings for using surplus stored energy when grabbing such energy at times of lower demand rate (when the cost per kwh, for instance were cheaper). One particular use of storing such energy comes by way of freezing water, for instance, when the cost of electricity is typified by well predicted periodic demand (and hence cost) fluctuations (e.g, consider in the summer when electric demand rates are higher mid day relative post mid night especially where the use of cooling systems tend to be in maximum use). One thermal cooling exchange system actually generates ice from water at night when costs are lower in producing, and then uses this stored 'energy' in the day time in provisioning coolant energy. One might add this is especially beneficial not only to utilities themselves in augmenting energy use especially in reducing grid stress loads when it were more common place that surplus cheaper energy were stored for re use at a later time, hence reducing peak time use loads.
The more modern energy problem isn't that stored energy can't be found somewhere resident in nature. After all, the famous energy mass equation tells us there is a tremendous amount of potential energy found in matter in general, and then consider other forms found in hydro carbons (e.g., fossil fuels), but much of this is given as a thermally released kinetic energy when it is to be used. Thus, when it comes to the harvest and use of energy, predominantly technology relies upon the releasing the thermal forms of this energy and then kinetically transforming this battery 'stored' energy into electrical energy, for instance, as in a turbine driven by pressure state changes which in turn is coupled to a electro magnetic coil which in turn produces electricity, and this is how much of the world's harvested energy is presently generated (at least I emphasis primarily although trends are starting to change). The bigger problem in using say fossil fuel hydro carbons, however, is that the rate of consumption is neither in keeping to the rate of replenishment (only a hundred years into the hurdle of one technological revolution) leads us with much greater rapidity diminishing the supply side of stored solar energy that were once given plant/vegetation matter that were long since distilled into the recesses of our earth. One would remind this were old fashioned solar technology having produced such stored energy, or if we forget, our fossil fuels were solar energy created products (either more directly or indirectly). Having illustrated commonly stored and used forms of energy, it seems that a more direct conversion and storage of electrical energy tends to be less commonly found, and I'd add to this problem the inherent issues in using hydro carbons in producing electricity. One, thermal efficiency conversion to kinetic energy while efficient aren't maximally efficient (meaning there is typified loss of energy in such process) usually this is given by loss of thermal energy before having translated into the kinetic energy driving, for instance, the turbine. Albeit improvements in recent decades have increased efficiency here by way of thermal recapture systems incorporated into such power generation systems, or if one considers the battery here. All the inefficiencies given by way of diffuse light energy producing the hydro carbon would typically lead to yet more added inefficiency in the direct production of electricity. Also consider, for example between the car engine and specifically designed to produce electricity power generators, and one would note differences between the two. Namely, the car engine is generally maximized around producing kinetic energy, while the power generator (for electricity) is maximized around producing electricity. At least if you hooked up a power invert er to that car engine you might produce enough energy to power a few light bulbs but nothing more since much of that energy is intended for translated into kinetically driving the car mechanically as opposed to powering light bulbs. Hence it does matter, how systems are designed in, for instance, harnessing thermal heat energy and translating this to kinetic energy which is then in turn translated into electrical energy.
Ironically while I've read some state that electrical batteries are a waste of production effort, given one cost, mass and size. On the other hand, when one cuts out all the middle mechanics used in producing electricity, direct solar to electrical energy conversion is exceedingly efficient relative to fossil fuel energy in so far relative to all the waste accumulated in the later process. Its just that we hadn't considered all the externalized loss in so far as setting the price of harvested crude oil, for example. Considering then that solar technology is steadily improving in so far as efficiency (picture below shows a timeline of this) .
a.jpg)
Added to this, cost production have also trended in the way of being cheaper
The cost per kwh of solar having dropped significantly in recent decades (see also http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/business/energy-environment/solar-and-wind-energy-start-to-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html?_r=0) even potentially below the cost of traditional utilities in some markets also indicates stronger competitive leveraging for solar in energy markets here. If likely progress is given for solar technology, its not hard in seeing that future technology in harvesting energy of this type isn't even more so a given.
Where it seems the downside of being able to benefit and use solar, on the other hand, at the moment has relied upon having ample enough and profitable enough space in harvesting such energy, and then I might add in lieu of the other scope of this problem. If one were producing energy (that weren't going back into a utilities electrical grid that weren't constantly maximizing the distribution of electricity for us), there'd be waste energy, and even given any potential grid distributive maximum, I would offer that one technology mentioned at the outset, namely, the thermal coolant battery speaks of something even problematic given by electrical generation today. Neither is production so perfect that well known periodic demand cycles would make storing energy actually beneficial at off peak times. This is to say that our economic models of energy distribution speak of potential inefficiencies in power distribution, and that actually over abundance of energy versus under abundance of energy product results in economic cost differentials found here, or in other words, it seems that even our traditional utilities could benefit in the way of conserving and storing power here.
This other aim of mine in this essay of mine is that in harvesting energy and finding better long term storage means for such electricity, we'd likely find more homes potentially in the way of investing towards an independent energies future. One because maximum efficiency is necessarily periodic in nature, at least governed by received solar energy at maximum optimal power generating times of the year versus less optimal times, but also indicated by weather conditions and anything else here. The other portion of this problem is that 'off the grid' living necessarily means that mostly all such excess energy is wasted. As in the Electric Vehicle parity problem which relates density of stored energy, considering that a gallon of gasoline stores approximately 33.7 kwh s of energy relative to a larger mass volume electric battery storing around 14.4 kwh of energy its easier to see that gasoline as stored energy has advantages here in the energy storage solutions problem, and it is incidentally one reason why electric vehicles have been severely disadvantaged for a long time (see also EV parity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_vehicle_battery. ) and still continues to be disadvantaged. Then considering that a market price battery equivalent of gasoline only costs $2.34 per gallon where I live at present, and that while being completely expendable on the other hand is extremely cheap. The other mass energy storage alternative comes at a much higher cost. Tesla's interest in slating such a product is still in the thousands of dollars range and still provides around a 10 kwh amount of storage capacity for well over the mass equivalent of gasoline that stores (such gas storing over three times the amount of energy found in such home battery). Obviously the big revolution in time comes by improving the energy storage parity problem found here, or in other words, if we can find ways to make electrical energy storage cheaper here, while reducing mass and materials, we'd have all the more incentive to use less the traditional energy storage that we use today (namely, fossil fuels). Secondly, if, for instance, electrical energy could be better not only harvested but stored, means greater likely independence for any one individual to manage living in 'off grid' circumstances. I imagine in some future someone being able to use electrical power harvested from peak previous seasons during off peak seasonal time and this directly stored in the form of electricity with no power generation conversions.
The more modern energy problem isn't that stored energy can't be found somewhere resident in nature. After all, the famous energy mass equation tells us there is a tremendous amount of potential energy found in matter in general, and then consider other forms found in hydro carbons (e.g., fossil fuels), but much of this is given as a thermally released kinetic energy when it is to be used. Thus, when it comes to the harvest and use of energy, predominantly technology relies upon the releasing the thermal forms of this energy and then kinetically transforming this battery 'stored' energy into electrical energy, for instance, as in a turbine driven by pressure state changes which in turn is coupled to a electro magnetic coil which in turn produces electricity, and this is how much of the world's harvested energy is presently generated (at least I emphasis primarily although trends are starting to change). The bigger problem in using say fossil fuel hydro carbons, however, is that the rate of consumption is neither in keeping to the rate of replenishment (only a hundred years into the hurdle of one technological revolution) leads us with much greater rapidity diminishing the supply side of stored solar energy that were once given plant/vegetation matter that were long since distilled into the recesses of our earth. One would remind this were old fashioned solar technology having produced such stored energy, or if we forget, our fossil fuels were solar energy created products (either more directly or indirectly). Having illustrated commonly stored and used forms of energy, it seems that a more direct conversion and storage of electrical energy tends to be less commonly found, and I'd add to this problem the inherent issues in using hydro carbons in producing electricity. One, thermal efficiency conversion to kinetic energy while efficient aren't maximally efficient (meaning there is typified loss of energy in such process) usually this is given by loss of thermal energy before having translated into the kinetic energy driving, for instance, the turbine. Albeit improvements in recent decades have increased efficiency here by way of thermal recapture systems incorporated into such power generation systems, or if one considers the battery here. All the inefficiencies given by way of diffuse light energy producing the hydro carbon would typically lead to yet more added inefficiency in the direct production of electricity. Also consider, for example between the car engine and specifically designed to produce electricity power generators, and one would note differences between the two. Namely, the car engine is generally maximized around producing kinetic energy, while the power generator (for electricity) is maximized around producing electricity. At least if you hooked up a power invert er to that car engine you might produce enough energy to power a few light bulbs but nothing more since much of that energy is intended for translated into kinetically driving the car mechanically as opposed to powering light bulbs. Hence it does matter, how systems are designed in, for instance, harnessing thermal heat energy and translating this to kinetic energy which is then in turn translated into electrical energy.
Ironically while I've read some state that electrical batteries are a waste of production effort, given one cost, mass and size. On the other hand, when one cuts out all the middle mechanics used in producing electricity, direct solar to electrical energy conversion is exceedingly efficient relative to fossil fuel energy in so far relative to all the waste accumulated in the later process. Its just that we hadn't considered all the externalized loss in so far as setting the price of harvested crude oil, for example. Considering then that solar technology is steadily improving in so far as efficiency (picture below shows a timeline of this) .
a.jpg)
Added to this, cost production have also trended in the way of being cheaper
Worth also noting here that Commercially available solar cells (as of 2006) reached system efficiencies between 5 and 19% (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cell_efficiency)And that yet the technology is yet below theoretical maximums for existing materials, it seems that photo voltaics still have yet much expansion, and this assuming that neither alternative lower cost materials aren't found elsewhere in the near future.
The cost per kwh of solar having dropped significantly in recent decades (see also http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/business/energy-environment/solar-and-wind-energy-start-to-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html?_r=0) even potentially below the cost of traditional utilities in some markets also indicates stronger competitive leveraging for solar in energy markets here. If likely progress is given for solar technology, its not hard in seeing that future technology in harvesting energy of this type isn't even more so a given.
Where it seems the downside of being able to benefit and use solar, on the other hand, at the moment has relied upon having ample enough and profitable enough space in harvesting such energy, and then I might add in lieu of the other scope of this problem. If one were producing energy (that weren't going back into a utilities electrical grid that weren't constantly maximizing the distribution of electricity for us), there'd be waste energy, and even given any potential grid distributive maximum, I would offer that one technology mentioned at the outset, namely, the thermal coolant battery speaks of something even problematic given by electrical generation today. Neither is production so perfect that well known periodic demand cycles would make storing energy actually beneficial at off peak times. This is to say that our economic models of energy distribution speak of potential inefficiencies in power distribution, and that actually over abundance of energy versus under abundance of energy product results in economic cost differentials found here, or in other words, it seems that even our traditional utilities could benefit in the way of conserving and storing power here.
This other aim of mine in this essay of mine is that in harvesting energy and finding better long term storage means for such electricity, we'd likely find more homes potentially in the way of investing towards an independent energies future. One because maximum efficiency is necessarily periodic in nature, at least governed by received solar energy at maximum optimal power generating times of the year versus less optimal times, but also indicated by weather conditions and anything else here. The other portion of this problem is that 'off the grid' living necessarily means that mostly all such excess energy is wasted. As in the Electric Vehicle parity problem which relates density of stored energy, considering that a gallon of gasoline stores approximately 33.7 kwh s of energy relative to a larger mass volume electric battery storing around 14.4 kwh of energy its easier to see that gasoline as stored energy has advantages here in the energy storage solutions problem, and it is incidentally one reason why electric vehicles have been severely disadvantaged for a long time (see also EV parity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_vehicle_battery. ) and still continues to be disadvantaged. Then considering that a market price battery equivalent of gasoline only costs $2.34 per gallon where I live at present, and that while being completely expendable on the other hand is extremely cheap. The other mass energy storage alternative comes at a much higher cost. Tesla's interest in slating such a product is still in the thousands of dollars range and still provides around a 10 kwh amount of storage capacity for well over the mass equivalent of gasoline that stores (such gas storing over three times the amount of energy found in such home battery). Obviously the big revolution in time comes by improving the energy storage parity problem found here, or in other words, if we can find ways to make electrical energy storage cheaper here, while reducing mass and materials, we'd have all the more incentive to use less the traditional energy storage that we use today (namely, fossil fuels). Secondly, if, for instance, electrical energy could be better not only harvested but stored, means greater likely independence for any one individual to manage living in 'off grid' circumstances. I imagine in some future someone being able to use electrical power harvested from peak previous seasons during off peak seasonal time and this directly stored in the form of electricity with no power generation conversions.
No comments:
Post a Comment