What is the best way to store energy from solar or wind in a DIY storage at home? Hydrogen or a flywheel or something else? I Think about 1 to 10 KW/h
>flywheel
Is that a joke? Seriously I wonder what would happen if flywheels became the main energy storage device for solar power? With the earth covered in millions of giant flywheels wouldn't the gyroscopic force slow the rotation of the earth?
>>955754
Vacuum sealed flywheels are actually a pretty great way to store energy
>>955752
maybe this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3p_daUDvI8
>>955761
How does that work? Or in other words, how is the energy transfered? Magnetically?
>>955767
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flywheel_energy_storage
>>955767
Yes, with a electic motor / generator
Batteries.
The answer to your question is batteries.
Now if you want to change your question from best to nontraditional way.
>>955770
op here:
about I 've been thinking. they have too little live cycles
>>955772
..and they are expensive.
>>955768
Advanced FES systems have rotors made of high strength carbon-fiber composites, suspended by magnetic bearings, and spinning at speeds from 20,000 to over 50,000 rpm in a vacuum enclosure.[4] Such flywheels can come up to speed in a matter of minutes – reaching their energy capacity much more quickly than some other forms of storage.[4]
>NASA
OK, time to cut their budget again Lou.
>>955767
You put a generator in it
OP you will have a pretty hard time making one. Did I mention they are basically a bomb?
But hey if we are talking crazy how about a molten sodium sulfur battery?
>>955772
>>955773
Let's face it, you will use batteries in the end. Cost per KWh can be pretty good. Supposedly the Tesla Power wall is pretty good
>>955777
Storing hydrogen can be a bomb, too.
But a fuel cell solution is the cheaper way i think.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjPVbRYERlU
>>955754
Gotta need to make sure that about half of all flywheels rotate in the opposite direction.
>>955754
>the gyroscopic force
no that has nothing to do with it
>earth covered
spin yourself on a swivel chair then spin a basketball on your finger, see what happens
(hint: nothing)
>>955776
There's already power plants using this tech now.
https://www.google.com/search?q=flywheel+energy+power+plant&tbm=isch
>>955798
85% efficient
thats a big drop from the 90+ usually quoted.
numbers are rubbish anyway, the system has continuous losses, the longer you leave it running the less efficient it is.
>>955800
if its build properly (vacuum, magnets, brushless motor) the loss is 50% a day. Seems enough for a solar storage. U just need to double the solarcells.
look at this guy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlOaGE1b-9Q
>>955752
My advice would be to use a solid fuel generated by self-replicating biodegradable solar cells. You could use it as a building material AND a fuel, and you wouldn't have to spend any time on maintainence because your solar cells could repair themselves, and your fuel is single-use so it wouldn't wear out like rechargeable batteries. The fuel also stores well, so you could go a whole season without adequate sunlight if you needed to.
I'm talking about wood.
>>955812
You are right. Do u know how much watt I will get from a squarefoot a day? And which wood is the fastest growing in view of energy per time?
>>955785
>Storing hydrogen can be a bomb, too.
not as violent a reaction, and preventing it from going up is much simpler/available/affordable than properly designing the housing for the spinning discus of death.
>>955797
>spin yourself on a swivel chair then spin a basketball on your finger, see what happens
A guy from Greenwich calls up and says, "Cut that out!"
>>955809
seems like a waste to me
my favourite is pumped hydro.
a perfectly balanced carbon fibre flywheel at thousands of rpm under a vacuum isn't something you throw together at home is it?
>>955752
Own two flywheel systems. But I wouldn't recommend it for storage of energy, they are designed for ride-thru scenarios while waiting for another source to take over (in my case diesel engines).
>6 ton flywheel, good for 12 seconds of full power draw of 1.5mw until diesels start (4 secs)
>>955761
Vacuum sealed? Why bother with vacuum, wouldn't most of the friction be in the shaft/bearings?
> DIY storage at home
> flywheel at 50k RPM
> magnetic bearings
> vacuum chambers
> carbon composites
> NASA
> batteries immediately dismissed as too expensive
Never change /diy/, never change.
>>955854
One you're magnetically suspended, air drag is your next biggest loss aside from maybe inductive losses.
>>955800
>the system has continuous losses
>the longer you leave it running the less efficient it is
Same with every system ever including the universe itself. Entropy is a real bitch.
>>955820
Already a thing, "GM eucalyptus tree".
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/nov/15/gm-trees-bred-world-energy
>>955965
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbYTh2y73F8
>>955965
seeing pics like this is what i need to see more often. thx anon, humans are smart mother fuckers, well us smart ones...
>>955785
The fuck is that? That ain't a fucking fuel cell. Fuck that has a high electrolysis voltage. It's gotta be inefficient as fuck.
>> stainless steel electrodes
The fuck, that's gonna corrode. I mean fuck at least use graphite electrodes.
There's no means of pressurizing the hydrogen either, so good luck storing much.
I hate these goddamn HHO generators that claim to be fuel cells.
>>955812
>>955965
Plants have a solar conversion efficiency of less than 3%. Solar cells are like 20%. And if you plan to burn your plants to generate power, the efficiency is even worse.
Plants are a really fucking shitty way to harness solar power.
>>955752
>What is the best way to store energy from solar or wind in a DIY storage at home?
Honestly, batteries are probably your best bet at the household scale (probably lead-acid, though sodium-sulfur might be worth a look - not sure if it's viable at this small a scale yet). Flywheels and thermal storage might also be worth looking into (the former could be convenient with wind turbines since you could spin it up mechanically without electrical conversion losses, and the latter would make the most sense in conjunction with concentrated solar-thermal). There are other solutions that make more sense at the grid level (for instance, pumped hydro is very appealing wherever it is viable), but at the individual household level your options are frankly somewhat narrower.
And hydrogen is meme-tier, don't bother.
>>955754
>Is that a joke?
Not at all. http://beaconpower.com/
>With the earth covered in millions of giant flywheels wouldn't the gyroscopic force slow the rotation of the earth?
That's not how precession works.
Also you could orient a flywheel with the Earth's axis and eliminate any precession effect altogether, though this would more likely be for alleviating bearing loads than worrying about destabilizing the entire Earth.
>>955773
That's the main appeal of sodium-sulfur. The main downside is they need to be kept hot (>300* C) to work.
>>955776
>Such flywheels can come up to speed in a matter of minutes
This is one of the BIGGEST advantages of flywheels, for specialty applications (i.e. >>955842). Flywheel-based compulsators can rival even capacitor banks in terms of pulsed power absorption and output. But for renewable energy storage, they're not quite so extraordinary.
>>955854
>wouldn't most of the friction be in the shaft/bearings?
Not unless it's a very heavy, very slow flywheel.
>>955884
This too. You might be able to do some sort of DIY flywheel storage system, but it won't be quite like these state-of-the-art vacuum maglev flywheels.
>>955752
You got land? My vote is for pumped hydro.
>>955752
capacitors could be a interesting place to look.
Just sell your excess power.
>>956194
Or if he doesn't have the land Compressed air energy storage
>>956140
>Plants are a really fucking shitty way to harness solar power.
Actually, they are the best long term storage system ever devised. With all human forms of storage, you can't get as long term and still have it work.
>>956201
Those are only ever good for short term storage. They discharge themselves rather quickly. It is really their only downfall when considering them to replace batteries for instance.
>>955985
The most interesting aspect is the point from which the shot was taken.
It is like you are looking down on a project that an organism has taken on to supply itself.
>>956216
His post just shows how removed he is from the real world.
Some thing that is so dead simple and requires minimal maintenance and the only 2 major costs of operation is the implementation and harvesting (including processing) and you can sit on that shit for fucking decades.
>>956140
how much does a seed cost?
how much does a solar panel cost?
there is a reason bio-fuels are a thing
>>956241
Yes, because land is cheaper than solar panels.
If you have severely limited space, solar panels are much more efficient.
>>956242
Um, no. they both require an equal footprint of ground exposed to sunlight.
Solar panels are much MUCH less efficient at turning sunlight into energy. However, all the systems that we have for processing the chemical energy from plants into electrical energy are not all that efficient, so that's where the loss is.
Moreover, biofuel systems such as woodgas generators or wood chip steam generators are better at providing around the clock continuous reliable power without needing a battery bank replaced every few years.
so peak operating efficiency is not the most important thing.
Really, the main advantage of solar is not having to harvest, or worry about water/irrigation.
>>956383
>> solar cells much less efficient
BULLSHIT. Solar cells are typically around 20% efficient(pic related). At the very best plants are 7-8% efficient at conversion of sunlight to chemical energy and typically 0.1-2% efficient:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthetic_efficiency
Not to mention we can't really get much of this chemical energy because plants have to spend some of it to stay alive.
Plants are a really shitty way to harness solar energy.
You need a pretty huge forest to provide round the clock heating all the time.
>>955754
I once read a short story about a civilization that never discovered energy storage beyond the flywheel
It was pretty cool honestly
>>955752
compressed air is a viable alternative.
large tanks for LP are pressure tight to over 350psi, compressors and airmotors are off the shelf items.
It is not as energy efficient as batteries, but if you consider total cost of ownership you might find it attractive.
>>956456
>Plants are a really shitty way to harness solar energy.
Actually, they are not. Solar cells are fucking terrible. That "efficiency" doesn't relate to plants in the same manner. kid.
Buy dead batteries, or a fucked hybrid car, or a fucked ebike, or go to your local recycling plant and salvage all the batteries you can.
For mobile/portable use old batteries are shit, but as a home battery bank they're fine.
>>955785
What's the benefit to separating it?
Only storing the hydrogen and using whatever oxygen's around when you need it?
I'd rather just plain hydroxy with a small combustion engine and a generator.
>>956226
My main concern with plants is how to convert them back to liquid energy. Unless you're capturing all the smoke, fuck burning them.
I hear about wood gassifiers, but they just make gasses that are dirty burning (or so I hear).
I'd love a nice clean solution, I have so much fucking biomass to spare and I wish I could harness it, not just use it as compost to end up with more biomass.
>>956529
>> what's the benefit to separating it
Well for one an oxy-hydrogen mixture is a goddamn bomb. You can't pressurize it because it will go boom.
Part of the reason hydrogen is great for energy storage is that you don't have to store the oxygen(at least on Earth's surface). Storing the oxygen is a waste of space.
>> combustion engine
Using a combustion engine to generate power from hydrogen is dumb, because fuel cells kick ass. Instead of this business of going from chemical--> thermal--> mechanical--> electrical energy it's just chemical energy--> electrical energy
>>956484
Compressed air sounds good. But how much energyloss will there be of thermal effekts. And how much energy can be stored in 1m3 Air?
>>956743
all we need is a small temporary compression containment to run car's on water
>>956773
You're retarded. Please learn to into thermodynamics.
>>956773
Your Brain runs on water
>>956783
of course
>>956779
you are saying we can't temporarily compress hydrogen and inject it into an engine with a a squirt of oxygen to make it combust?
>>956790
Of course you could, it would only produce as much energy as you used to split the water in the first place. In which case you could have just used that electricity to turn the wheels by means of an electric motor.
Congratulations you just invented the world's least efficient electric car.
>>956792
What is an Alternator? a highly efficient one??
what are batteries?
>>956795
3/10 if trolling, 0/10 if actually that retarded.
If you use the engine to generate electricity, the electricity to generate fuel for the engine, then burn the fuel to run the engine, you haven't generated any extra power, all you've done is add extra layers of inefficiency.
And if you had the electricity before you started the engine then all you have is an incredibly inefficient electric car that also consumes water. Once the electricity is used up you can't split the water, you run out of fuel and the engine stops.
What you have is not a perpetual motion machine, but a machine of diminishing returns. Every time power goes through a cycle you end up with less than you started with, losing most of it as heat.
>>956796
Adding a regenerative braking system to a gasoline powered car and using that to make hydrogen for a boost would make it an incredibly inefficient hybrid. Better to store power in batteries or capacitors and dump it into electric motor(s).
>>956799
This is why we don't get anyplace
>>956786
>>956783
>>956779
>>956773
>>956762
Thee are already hydraulic hybrid vehicles that partially run on compressed gas, normally compressed via regenerative breaking.
http://gas2.org/2008/10/28/ups-is-first-in-delivery-industry-to-test-hydraulic-hybrids/
http://www.gizmag.com/air-hybrid-vehicles-could-cut-fuel-consumption-in-half/17810/
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/146450-peugeot-unveils-hydraulic-air-hybrid-80-mpg-car
>>956806
Just. use. batteries.
>>956810
but also using a better alternator of course
>>956810
Fuck this shit. You guys build yourselves a perpetual motion machine then. I'm out.
>>956812
i plan on it
>>956533
Burn biomass and heat steam turbine. Only burn biomass when you need it.
I heard about those guys planning to make flywheel out of reinforced concrete because it's way more cheaper than metal.
Is it possible to have nanoscale flywheels?
Billions of them.
>>956808
I think you mean, "Stop using combustion engines you massive tard."
>>956812
No one but you is talking about perpetual motion machines. Regenerative breaking to make hydrogen is a novel idea and has absolutely nothing to do with perpetual motion, you massive tard.
>>956827
>I heard about those guys planning to make flywheel out of reinforced concrete because it's way more cheaper than metal.
For low RPM uses it is great.
>Is it possible to have nanoscale flywheels?
>Billions of them.
Yes, but to what end?
>dat feel when you're already made of atomic-scale electron-based flywheels.
>>956827
>I heard about those guys planning to make flywheel out of reinforced concrete because it's way more cheaper than metal.
Reinforced concrete derives its tensile strength almost entirely from the rebar. Seems like it'd be more cost-effective just to make an iron/steel flywheel that turns a higher RPM.
Useful side note: for isentropic materials (i.e. most non-composites), a Stodola disc flywheel is about twice as effective as a ring-type flywheel (either twice the safety factor or twice the energy stored).
>>955752
Does your utility service buy energy back at price? If so sell it back directly and store it as money.
>>955777
>Mfw thinking "lol why would you use CF for the wheel, that's stupid light"
>Mfw realizing "it's the only affordable material that can handle the rotation"
Carry on!
Flywheels are interesting, they are already used small scale to compensate for starting times of gas/oil plants, and are scheduled for deploying in multiple places around the world to make it easier to handle peak.
>>956533
Compost in closed system (inb4 bomb)
Harness methane for fuel and cooking
Sell decomposed biomass as useful fertilizer and nutrient rich mulch ("super soil")
??????
Profit
>>955810
>depressed grandpa voice
;_;
>>956790
Hydrogen is an energy carrier. Little more.
It's a clean energy carrier, but still just that. The reason it's being touted as an alternative to batteries, gasoline, diesel, pressurized air, LPG etc is the cleanliness, mainly.
Storage wise it's a little bit of an engineering nightmare, it needs to be stored and transferred at extreme pressures, and at the same time you have to deal with pretty substantial losses over time due to the molecules being tinier than the material of any tank ever.
But it's a good idea. It just needs some next level material engineering shit to be a fully viable option to totally replace fossils as a carrier.
Then again, that's more likely than you think. Gasoline and Diesel were both dumped in the rivers when oil companies though kerosene was the only usable/marketable product from oil..
There's nothing at all wrong with flywheels. They are the best temp storage system when you need a lot of power instantly. They are best used to keep things running when something goes wrong, gets shut off for a few seconds, or needs to switch between one thing and another. Even the power plants that use them only use them for trouble spots in service.
It's like you people forgot what a flywheel is and is used for.
>>955752
http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/hydrostor-underwater-balloons/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/12/12/underwater-balloons-a-new-idea-in-energy-storage/
http://www.hydrostor.ca/
http://www.sciencealert.com/underwater-balloons-could-give-us-a-new-way-of-storing-renewable-energy
https://youtu.be/c7j2lwz4_Vs
>>956773
What the fucking fuck are you talking about? This thread is about storing energy so you can power your house and out of the fucking blue you bring up running cars on water.
What the fuck is " a small temporary compression containment?"
>>956783
your brain does not run on water. It runs almost exclusively on glucose.
>>956790
Which is exactly why you can't compress an hydrogen oxygen mixture idiot
>>956810
no you are fucking wrong. In a hydraulic hybrid is not powered by water it is powered by compressed gas.
Actually you know what forget about what I said about HHO gas being dangerous, why don't you build your idea and store the HHO uncompressed in a big gasbag on top your vehicle. Make sure to add a hydrogen preheater, a little electric arc that heats up the mixture before passing it into the engine.
In light bulbs, duh
I think solar has much more efficiency in storing heat in granite or graphite, but I could be wrong
>>955884
Thinking about making a personal coal power plant, how do I make a turbine?
>>957876
Get really good at shaping metal. Or you can just make a shitty one.
The idea is fairly simple, a hot gas (steam) flows through a channel than you have lined with specially shaped blades so then when the high pressure steam pushes it's way through the channel it also pushes on gorillion blades. Look up blade profiles. Make some inital test blades. Wouldn't hurt to go to trade school for a couple of years too.
>>957335
Interesting idea, but I don't understand why they want to drill deep underground for their pipelines instead of just running it along the surface or in a shallow trench.
http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/technik/forschung-pumpspeicher-am-meeresgrund-sollen-windstrom-puffern-a-1078397.html
>>957894
Come companies don't even put it into anything. Their pipelines are above ground and on the bottom of the lake/sea bed.
For seas were tides can move things around, drilling may be the longer term solution to prevent wear and tear.
>>955842
So do you keep them spinning all the time, ready for action?
What kind of mine is that? or are we witnessing a return of bunkerbro
>>955842
Bunker anon, why you don't make threads anymore? Don't make me do one asking where are you and begging you to make pics. Make one pls
>>955752
Use solar/wind to run pumps. Pump water into cistern on a hill/ water tower. Use water and gravity with turbine to make electricity.
Water is a very good way to store energy. Bonus, lots of water, more valuable than gold.
>>956192
>And hydrogen is meme-tier
Hydrogen is preferred by the oil/gas companies because it makes their product more diverse and allows them to keep using most of their infrastructure. People don't really care about the most efficient energy storage if it suits their day to day needs. If hydrogen is dirt-cheap to produce then the efficiency is less important.
>>958416
>If hydrogen is dirt-cheap to produce then the efficiency is less important.
Hydrogen is already dirt-cheap to produce from cheap energetic feedstocks (i.e. petroleum or natural gas). It is NOT dirt-cheap, from either a monetary or efficiency standpoint, to produce via electrolysis.
So, if I may clarify: hydrogen energy storage is meme-tier.
>>958417
>Hydrogen is already dirt-cheap to produce from cheap energetic feedstocks (i.e. petroleum or natural gas). It is NOT dirt-cheap, from either a monetary or efficiency standpoint, to produce via electrolysis.
I get what you're saying, I already understand that. I'm agreeing with you. I'm saying that it's been pushed as some sort of miracle of science by the oil/gas industries as a way to keep the majority of their supply chain in place and to keep their customers.
That said, if ultimately it becomes as cheap for consumers to buy/use a hydrogen-powered car, than say an electric car with a Lithium-based fuel cell; hydrogen could become an alluring alternative. Electric cars would have to be considerably cheaper to use if not more convenient than a hydrogen vehicle. It's hard to beat the quick fill up.
>>956533
Look into syngas, you mix the smoke with air and heat to produce it
>>958119
Yes, the power mains runs through them (2% loss in energy), so whenever there is a power outage they automagically take over for the few seconds the diesel engine needs to start.
>>958128
Nothing interesting to post, I've just been bathroom tiling for a few weeks now. Lots of wcs.
>tfw never want to see a tile again
>>955812
[. spoiler .] faggot
good post
>>958496
>I've just been bathroom tiling for a few weeks now.
>Lots of wcs.
I bet your an expert by now. lol
>>958496
You should make an imgur dump man. Please do a dump
>>955842
how much have you spent so far in your bunker?
>>958563
Getting there...
>>958573
But thats not how 4chan works.
>>958578
A lot, but I do everything myself (as long as the law lets me), when I run into larger stuff I order materials from China (40f container China-to-door is $2k.
>>958582
Homegrowmen here. Were you ever going to have a place to grow some types of food? The only thing that I can think of that would be practical would be culinary mushrooms. Less maintenance, easily stackable grow medium, long lasting depending on medium (shiitake grown on logs lasts years). Only ambient light is needed during their flushing time. You can even use pearl oyster mushrooms to process paper/cellulose waste products. Salad greens would also be practical if you really wanted something to grow and didn't mind using the extra electric for light.
I don't really remember you saying anything about growing anything though.
>>958496
We use them at our data center as well, hearing them wind down when we lose power is always fun.
>>958631
I imagine sprouts would be the most practical underground
>>958648
Indeed, for greens they do have a near instant growth rate and turnaround rate to consumption.
>>956456
>Solar cells are typically around 20% efficient(pic related). At the very best plants are 7-8% efficient at conversion of sunlight to chemical energy and typically 0.1-2% efficient:
On top of that, there are going to be EVEN MORE losses when you try to convert that stored chemical energy into work or electrical power. A typical small steam engine might achieve around 30% efficiency, so you're talking only a third of that 0.1-2% for an overall efficiency of just 0.03-0.6%.
If you have fuckloads of land and fairly low energy demand, it might still be worth it since wood/biomass is pretty much self-sustaining. But if you don't have that luxury, you'll probably be better off with direct PV or solar-thermal.
>>955752
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity
Good question - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLaVbg2ZeC8
>>955752
If you live close to a water plan stay away from fancy stuff. Just use a windmill to pump water into a tank and backturbine the water when electric current is needed. Not sure if legal but feasible.
