[ben_w]

> Right now we have about 30 GW worth of it on a grid with 1200 GW of generative capacity.

> Until that changes, every solar and wind installation is going to come paired with a gas peaker plant.

Sure; and as the necessary gas plants are mostly already all there, we can start by doing nothing, before gradually just switching them off as we build out the storage.

(The storage doesn't have to be batteries: gravity storage is cheap; disappointingly, hydrogen electrolysis doesn't exist in meaningful quantities yet, but it is no more mysterious magic than batteries; and there are more besides).

[nuancebydefault]

Sadly, I recently learned, gravity storage takes up massive amounts of space (nature?) because you need insane amounts of mass for storing relatively tiny amounts of energy. It usually has 50 per cent loss.

[ben_w]

Indeed. I certainly hope that we don't get lots of those cranes lifting and lowering concrete blocks: we might, because they appear to be really cheap; but we shouldn't, because of how much CO2 is produced by making concrete.

Only way to be sure we don't get them is to invent something better.

I do like the aesthetics of hydroelectric dams: they also need concrete, though proportionally less.

I think some people are working on eco-friendly cements that would make for eco-friendly concrete; we certainly need that too, regardless of how we solve power production.

[PaulHoule]

Don't know if this idea is really practical but I sure find it beautiful

https://www.wired.com/story/energy-vault-gravity-storage/