Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "Undecided with Matt Ferrell"
channel.
-
22
-
7
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
I have been binge watching permaculture videos (also carbon sequestering IN the soil in form of humus or Terra Preta = biochar, and trees are part of the "tech" , that carbon capture is extra ). Permaculture is not only about agriculture, it is a systemic use of resources - and the Amri project fits right in with the mindset, and like every good and (hopefully) sustainable solution it has several advantages, uses a systemic approach, works with the beginning and end in mind (the life cycle from getting the minerals and what is after 20 - 30 years of use), and uses existing easily available resources = plentyful and cheap metals and well known tech.
We already use a lot of lead it can be recycled and if the battery is good for 20 years (or even longer) and does not need a lot of maintainance that is ideal for commercial applications. Or neighbourhood projects. And brings costs down.
All the lead batteries needed for vehicles that run on fossil fuel that become obsolete can be recycled to become part of the new battery (and the waste would be mined, it would be taken care of).
Even if there would be a spill, as long as there is a concrete floor (it is heavy enough that one would need a solid foundation) the mess stays very local and can be cleaned up.
also the advantage if there is a fire.
Lithium batteries and an intense fire for whatever reason, are super dangerous for the firefighters.
it also uses existing technology (like how to control the molten metals, that is not an unknown, meaning the manufacturing of the containers is also not unknown tech. They also know what the containers can take).
3
-
The German government meanwhile restricts the installations of units of more than 10kW peak - their buddies from Big Energy do not like the competition. They fear to only become the backup for the rainy days and winter (which admitted is justified - and if they had not spouted the free market nonsense before when things were going their way I would cut them some slack).
It is not only that there are no subsidies for decent sized installations, now they have invented a financial penalty - even in not so sunny Germany installations (medium sized or larger) can meanwhile make do w/o any financial assistance (think medium sized companies that have a roof in the right direction, or households that use more energy for whatever reason, and with a second car that is more at home and can be easily charged whenever there is surplus).
Having CHEAP storage is a game changer, people and companies might consider getting off grid.
The current German restriction of the "free market"
Now they make the people harvesting solar energy paying twice. For the self-consumed ! energy PLUS sales tax (or another tax, I do not know the name) when they supply surplus to the grid (as it is counted when it is generated it is really taxed twice). Needless to say landlords are hindered to sell to the tenants (or to make a swap), neighbourhoods cannot band together as co-op, because that would make them an "electricity provider".
Being a provider comes with costs, burdens and whatnot.
I think that the double taxation does not apply if a company or a household would go off grid. At the moment most don't do it, but with reliable tech people with a larger property might have second thoughts. They already needed to have the secure room for the oil tank if they had a oil based furnace (many have in Germay) that should be good enough for a liquid metall battery. Good insulation or it heats up the basement in the summer.
The restriction by government means that currently many households and professionals do not go over the 10kW peak limit. But ideally any installation would have 30 % reserves compared to the typical highest demand.
Ideal means
investment to output, optimization, having the highest numbers of days without ANY power fro the grid - as long as that is achieveable at reasonable costs. Solar panels dropped in price, but cheap storage was still a limiting factor.
There is a cost for the handymen just showing up with vehicles and equipment. a 15 kW installion does not cost three times more than a 5kW project not even when it comes to getting the panels set up, never mind the setup up of the inverter, and the electrical work.
If the grid does not want their power on sunny days - why, they hopefully they can ramp up the batteries and for cheap. ideally car manufacturers would have an extra battery that can be easily plugged into the car as backup. It could charge during day, and next day the car can be used for a commute. Would be also an extenstion of reach for the occasional longer distance.
That battery would not even need to be Lithium based (if it is backup the weight is less consequential and if it is recharged at home, the fast charge capability is not as crucial (so an EV would have two cheap lead batteries, that are swapped around. or maybe a solid state.
3
-
3
-
3
-
Low cost thermal solar panels could increase efficiency or reduce the demand for dedicated area for the cheaper)horizontal installations. and in some areas vertical is not possible because of rock underground. It is also more insecure, you never know what is deep down until trying to drill into it (broken head and all, or one more day needed compared to what they thought. So horizontal loops a more predictable cost factor.
Ideally that extra thermal input first heats the warm water all year round (I assume you get that from the underground, too). Surplus heat from long summer days goes into the ground.
Uses more electricity in summer because the pump has to bring the heat underground (but only when PV output is good - by you or other users, so at least suplus renewable energy could be used. And many providers have better tarifs for the heat pump so it should not cost as much),.
That added heat gives users an edge in winter.
That could also be used to regenerate the heat underground to a sufficient extrent if a home has a small area of land but they want the cheaper horizontal system or vertical drilling is impossible or cost prohibitive.
or they would have the land but do not want to dedicate so much of the area to the pipes (you cannot build on it, not even a light shed because it seals off the underground. Cannot dig into it deeper, plant trees, run heavy machinery or a car over it. and even a convential lawn is a considerable barrier to penetration of rain water. Good soil or gravel, or sand is much better for restoring heat.
Normally most of the heat (that is taken out in winter) is regenerated with rainwater without any input from the homeowner (other than the restrictions for the use of the area they have to put up with).
So some low cost thermal solar panels could be the cheap work horses to bring some heat into the underground in summer, and could give more flexibility and they would not need to be very fancy.
It would be the 20 : 80 rule.
3
-
@bocadelcieloplaya3852 With reflecting snow cover and clear, sunny winter days one gets a decent harvest with solar panels (the short days are the problem). - I saw a video about an off grid homestead in Alaska.
In front of the cabin they have a metal constrructon with 3 solar panels, a very standard and modest setup.
They have a lever where they can switch the angle (of all 3 panels together). So in summer they fix it in the steeper position in the morning and late afternoon, and adjust in the default angle for solar panels when the sun is higher. In winter they keep it at the steep angle to catch as much energy as possible.
That was a modest installation but with a clever twist. They can optimize their harvest without high tech (the person that needs to be present is no problem in their case). And since the panels are within reach, they can easily brush off snow in winter, so the panels will start to harvest fast, when the sun comes out.
The panels are somewhat elevated, so if wildlife would be getting ideas .... But it is directly at the cabin, so they likely do not come that close anyway.
The man is retired, the wife still drives to work so they can easily adust the position twice per day, it is not much work. They also have a gas powered generator and wood heating.
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@MsSomeonenew For solar the economy of scale factor is 20 %. For wind it is 14 % (more "old" = mature tech involved). For processors it is much higher, see Murphy's law - but every product (class) has it. - For every doubling of globally installed capacities you get a price drop for the produced kWH of 20 (for solar) or 14 % for wind. That trend is very stable for solar, that goes on since the late 1970s.
It was not the passing of time that brought the price drops, the innovations did not manifest because of years going by - only when there were subsidies and other support the positive feedback loop established itself. For renewables the Chinese government deserves a lot of credit, they propped that up, and mass produced and installed a lot of solar panels and wind turbines in high volumes and calculated the costs over several years. So they got more orders and so on and so forth.
The communits of China used industrial mass production and economy of scale to jumpstart the technology.
Doubling the capacities is not hard when you start out, so you can expect massive price reductions within 3 years. Even if we very conservatively assume it is 10 % only.
For every 1,000 USD of investiment in year one, we are at 729 USD after 3 years (of subsequent 10 % price drops and that is a cautious assumption). If they have the loans or investors they can as well start out with a price of 8,000 in the first year to boost sales numbers and benefit from higher economy of scale effects.
I guaranee you after 5 years the prices will be at 6,000 USD, we have seen that with solar panels.
If the output of concrete or steel (old, mature tech) is globally doubled there may be still some improvements possible - but that is well established tech that is used in VERY high volumes, so the doubling can take a while.
The estimate (as given in the video 10: 50 ) was that the price (that is higher right now for the test series) will be 30 - 50 % below the current battery prices. And they will achieve those low prices between 2023 and 2030. The costs of the materials are 17 USD per kWh versus 51 USD for the Lithium ion batteries (costs for those batteries are expected to come down, not sure if that has to do with raw materials, But the liquid metall batteries are simple, so it should not be hard to gain advantages as soon as they mass produce).
30 - 50 (or even 20 %) lower costs soon - that is a game changer.
Especially in nations in the temperate and cold climate zone where peak demand and peak production do not align as nicely as in California, Texas or Australia (A/C needs the power when the sun shines). They do not have the same good conditions in Germany, Canada or Sweden - they have the highest demand in winter, when they harvest less solar energy.
In Morocco German investor Desertec and other investors build a solar park that concentrates heat and uses molten salt storage, so they can sell that electricity to Europe during night. And they also harvest during winter, it is still sunny and the lower temps are even better for the panels (no energy needed for cooling them).
I do not know the costs for molten salt storage but cheap storage could come in handy. Also in the South of Europe, they could ramp up production in those countries.
2
-
2
-
@jimstand You never know if it is "phony" until you carry out the research, that is why it is called BASIC research. Of course some professors will push their pet projects and the money might be better invested in other projects (where the professors are less talented with the sales pitches). - But WHO would get to decide what is pie in the sky and / a "waste of budgets" (at least for now).
A project can be solid and still it goes nowhere.
The Makani project achieved a lot but they did not get any more funding after 10 years and maybe it their approach is not possible - for now. The results are public domain (at least a lot), and maybe if some new materials are invented (to have a rope that ties them to the generator) someone comes back to that projects and picks up the batton.
The tricky thing was to steer the kite (which is big) and to make it start and land correctly. I understand that they had the battery "on board" - systems like Enerkite have a steel cable and the battery is charged on the ground, the kite does not need to learn to park itself ;)
That approach might win in the end - it is easier so also more realistic to achieve.Enerkite still seems to be afloat, but also still "testing". Their approach is simpliefied so it is likely easier to get the funding.
But a lot of experience was gained because of the Makani project, the engineers got a very good training by being part of the team. it was not in vain (google financed them in recent years, they got money from Shell .... The money was better spent on enthusiastic researchesr and engineers as opposed to being parked on some bank accounts.
if one out of 1000 "hare brained" projects turn out to be a hit - the 8 - 10 billion of us can easily live with the 990 that went nowhtere and the 9 that were decent but not spectacular. Mankind has that tech. And a few other research resutls might also be useful, maybe in another context in 10 years or 20 or 30.
They had no idea if nuclear fission could even work - they just tried (I am no fan, but that is beyond the point, 50,000 people in a secret city in the desert, and a few years of big funding). It took very long to produce penicillin as stable medication or to find medication against malaria (other then Quinin. Finding a SAFE polio vaccine was not easy either, they had a lot of flops).
And then there was the researcher that got the funding cut for mRNA technology in the 1990s because it was not a "viable" project with good prospects.
Ahem.
Like there was no market for a book like Harry Potter. Or not giving the Beatles a contract (both happened).
In her case access to a lab was enough to continue the research in her free time w/o being paid (that would not work for a project like the Makani kite or Ambri, because more engineering work is needed the objects are much larger, more people with special skills are needed, etc. (I seem to remember she not only lost the budgets but also her her job at the university so she could not use undergrad students either. Resp. had to get a new job).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@PaleGhost69 I am a fan of Lawton and bing watch his videos - but find his TED talks "underwhelming" (he held two during events in the Middle East. My impression is that he also did not get the audience all excited). Which is a shame. He explains the principles and philosophy, and that is all fine - but a person that is able to ruin every plant within a week never mind they could run a homestead or care for animals .... could recite those principles.
I have seen enthusiastic but inexperienced (clueless) persons announcing and debating all sorts of (half baked) alternative ideas. Or trying to run a homestead or little farm - but they failed.
In the end it has to function, too. High minded philosophies are not enough.
The fascinating thing about Geoff Lawtin is how to APPLIES the principles, the successes he had (and the problems and failures) and also the insight that a system needs TIME.
Also his ability to read a landscape and to UNDERSTAND a system - that did not come accross in the TED talks. I checked two TED talks and was left somewhat dissatisfied after watching them - and returned to binge watching the other uploads ;) on his channel.
You are able to find meaning in the TED talks AFTER you watched some of his other stuff where he talks about the real life use and related problems - but I doubt it excites persons that are new to the issue.
I would say one of the videos about What is a food forest. Or What is permaculture is a good point to start. He either shows something and does a walk and talk, or he gets questions from the group he teaches (online) and answers those - to the benefit of all that are online. Often he enhances the answer with things on his farm (explaining the principles). he also knows all the plants by name, he really knows his system and his stuff.
Plus his Q&A are short, often only 5 - 10 minutes, no ads and his friendly and enthusiastic, positive personality shines through. Or if he does a walk and talk on the Australian farm or the Jordan project (what is new, how have systems developed, etc) and greets the animals. Hillarious.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jakedarang Biontec (that visionary Hungarian scientist was a co-founder) got the equivalent of 450 million USD from the German government to develop a vaccine - and then Pfizer came on board. They did not "riks" money they let government take all the risks. mRNA has a lot of potential, Dr. Hotez acknowledges that - but on the other hand for a pandemic fast mass production for cheap (and likely other raw materials than the other producers need) are big advantages.
The yeast produced version that Dr. peter Hotez works on would be ideal. They got the genome in Jan. 2020 - like other labs.
But then he had to run around for 2 - 3 months to find private financiers for a cheap, easy to handle (temperature) mass vaccine for a pandemic They needed a few million USD - which is pocket change in that context.
The German governement also gave 200 - 300 million USD to another smaller company (BAYER snateched them up) to develop a vaccine.
That delay cost the group around Hotez a lot of time, I think they may be in the late stage of testing now. The tech is different than the vaccines where an adenovirus is the vehicle (Sputnik or Astra Zeneca for instance), and not as fancy as the mRNA vaccines.
Yeast produced vaccines are old fashioned tech if you will, but it is reliable, and cheap. Oddly enough no one in politics was interested to support that project as well, if only as backup for the other projects. If it would turn out to provide a safe and well functioing vaccine, it would of course be serious competition for the other (heavily subsidized) vaccines. Those that got much more money, but during a pandemic there is no such thing as "stranded" costs in vaccine development. The Astra Zeneca is problematic, but no one could know that until it was ready and being used on millions of people (it is still less risk than getting the disease or on the large scale allowing more and more mutations to pop up globally).
we need fast mass deployment. the more working vaccine of all kinds the better.
The Trump admin did favors to big pharma.
1
-
1