Dave N wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I think that an installation like this is on the cards in the next 20
years actually.

If we do go nuclear - and I think we must - the ability to use off peak
cheap electricity to power cars and houses is very great.

Indeed, but I don't think we should overlook the amount of energy
required by, and the amount of "hothouse" gases emitted during, the
manufacturing processes for heavy duty batteries and electronic control
systems, not to mention heavy gauge wiring with plastic coating and
large copper terminals. SFAIK, metal smelting processes alone require
huge amounts of power and produce toxic gases. Then there is the issue
of recycling heavy metals and plastics when the batteries and control
gear have reached the end of their working lives.

In other words, supplementing the direct consumption of electricity with
stored energy systems in every home will create problems for the
manufacture of sufficient plant irrespective of how the electricity is
generated. In fact the use of wind and wave power by its very nature
implies the installation of large stored energy systems somewhere.

I don't want to appear a doom merchant but I do believe that such
matters are significant.

They are, but less than you might think.

For a start, dont worry about energy used in making stuff. If its all
nuclear generated, its zero carbon.

All this 'carbon burnt in manufacture' becomes utterly meaningless if
your energy is carbon neutral.

There is an implied shift here, form 'energy conservation' to 'carbon
emission reduction'

The actual energy used is a very small fraction of what falls on te
earth..that won't affect the climate half as much as the CO2 does.

Very little industrial process actually generates Co2..smelting does a
bit, as does concrete making. Smelting you could probably do in order
ways than using carbon monoxide aqs a reducing agent..electrolysis for
example. I suspect there is no way to make cement without releasing CO2
though. But there are other materials..

Ive actually been to a lead and zinc smelters.. the place was dripping
sulphuric acid..and the old batteries were simply tipped into the
process at some point to recycle the lead. However we went there to
install toxic metal detectors, for the outflows, to monitor mercury and
cadmium levels..they are not that bad. Most of the nasties can be
separated out, at a cost. So although there are issue, I don';t see
them as insuperable. At some level to maintain an industrial or post
industrial lifestyle means SOME form of waste will be generated. You
have to literally pick your poison..ultimately the best battery material
is lithium anyway, which is plentiful and abundant almost everywhere, it
just takes a lot of power to extract. But with power cheaper, its not
such a big deal.

AND if my last posts calcs are correct, you can keep a house warm with a
few tons of stored hot water heated on E7 overnight anyway.

So battery requirements are not huge.




\









I suspect that I am only now beginning to
grasp the scope of problems created by an exponential growth in the use
of energy by mankind. If I am totally misguided, I would be grateful
for correction.