Comments by "Colorme Dubious" (@colormedubious4747) on "Real Engineering" channel.

  1. "Use energy to pump water up hill, this allows for rapid load following and controlled release" -- This technique is known as "pumped storage" and we already use it in a few locations. While not the same as pumped storage, the California and Colorado Aqueducts lift water over mountains and recapture some of the energy on the downhill side.
    2
  2. Wind and geothermal work whether the insolation (usable sunlight) is optimal or not. Not all batteries need to be electrochemical. You brought up hydro but didn't mention pumped storage, a technique we already use. If people have a problem with dams, let them demonstrate their commitment by giving up water. That ought to "flush out" the hypocrites! In all seriousness, there's no "silver bullet" and no One Big Solution for this. As you said, the key is diversification of sources. A lot of smaller-scale landfill gas recovery, waste heat recovery, waste-to-energy, and gas-fired power plants would supply adequate peaking in an environmentally acceptable manner.
    1
  3. The current state of the art is even dumber (and more interesting) than you might think. When these concepts were being debated in the 70s and 80s, the idea was NEVER to use the EDIBLE parts of plants to create biofuels to replace petroleum. The idea was to divert plant WASTE (leaves, stems, cobs, etc) to create a modest but reliable stream of additives to extend the lifespan of the fossil fuel supply. It was a similar approach to refining biodiesel from the contents of restaurants' grease traps. In other words: Do something useful with waste products over the short term (which is a two-for: eliminating the disposal burden and providing a valuable product) while developing better long term solutions. Money and politics shoved this reasonable approach into the realm of the absurd.
    1
  4.  @RealEngineering  This is why bridges splash into rivers and condo towers collapse!
    1