Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Kelteseth 22 days ago
So for a guy that literally has a company that produces batteries and solar panels, choose to use gas turbines. So much for saving the planet.
3 comments

He is building the skill tree in such a way that he is prioritising speed rather than environment.
Solar and batteries are a bad choice for a constant 24/7 load.

That's the exact reason we will never go fully solar (or wind) unless an insanely impressive battery breakthrough makes storage effectively free while using only common, renewable components rather than rare earths.

Solar, wind, etc are excellent parts of an energy system, but its nearly impossible to cover base load at scale with generation that may only run for 0-5 hours a day.

edit: typo

https://www.fastcompany.com/91500104/google-minnesota-data-c...

> The new plant in Minnesota will be big enough to deliver 300 megawatts of power and store an enormous 30 gigawatt-hours of energy, making it the largest battery by capacity that’s been announced so far. By comparison, that’s more storage than all of the battery projects built in the U.S. in 2024 added together.

That's to power a single data center though, how would that scale?

If I'm doing the math right, Minnesota used 65.7 TWh of power last year so to store 3 days worth of power just for that one city we would need a battery 18x larger than the one mentioned here.

I can't imagine we could ever scale such storage capacity for all energy use, let alone all the wind and solar required to fill it.

Sodium is an interesting chemistry, though it has different voltage curves than lithium ion once hardware is built to match it they may scale well for industrial use.

That still doesn't avoid the more fundamental math of having to store such massive amounts of energy though, even if you skip batteries and pump water to retention ponds uphill.

Even for small scale residential, the recommendation is to store 3 days worth of average usage to handle stretches of cloudy days and to have a generator for the times when that still doesn't cut it. You also need enough solar that 4-6 hours of generation can fill those batteries back up after a stretch of cloudy days.

You also have to contend with frequency issues. This is what took down Spain's grid, they had turned on a ton of solar at the time - with many gas plants offline a seemingly small dip below 60Hz really wrecks much of the system when it wasn't designed to handle those swings and triggers multiple safety mechanisms.

The Iberian blackout resulted from a way deeper and more complex reasons than your comment implies, and does not yet have a complete explanation.

The "inertia" issues already have solutions being used in production (in Australia, for example).

Oh it was extremely complex and I didn't intend to imply that the full explanation would fit in a single HN comment.

The inertia problem you mention wasn't solved in Spain though, and whether it can be solved or already is elsewhere is irrelevant here.

> So for a guy that literally has a company that produces batteries and solar panels, choose to use gas turbines

“Sorry, we have to shut down your database because it’s been overcast for the last two days”

Now, they could have a mix, of course, but just running on solar and batteries at that power is not realistic.