Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Its a chicken and egg issue I guess. Why would anyone develop energy storage solutions without renewables already in place?
Also I think it was a way to sell green power, with a lower initial buy in of just the production side.
I would think with cost of dumping excess power that building storage wouldn't cost that much more, atleast in an area with some hills. Or something like Toronto hydro is studying,
http://www.torontohydro.com/sites/electr...ageProject.aspx
I think you are assuming I am not encouraging the installation of renewables, that's not the case
I'm simply opposed to artificially increasing the rate of their market share growth through subsidy, which has created most of the issues we face at this point. Renewables were already being installed before FIT subsidies were put in place, and would have continued, simply at a slower, and I would argue, more manageable rate. The innovation with respect to storage would still have taken place, there simply would not have been the market distortions and price spikes we've witnessed, which are the result of the rate subsidies.
I personally don't see a lot of promise with compressed air in huge bags under the water in lake Ontario, as I think the density would be poor when compared to something like hydro electric banked storage, however that carries with it a suite of significant logistical challenges as well. Widespread reliance on massive batteries made of difficult to acquire metals like Lithium, which requires extensive mining to procure, seems a bit short sighted as well
Current/tidal generators also seem to show some promise but the output is quite low at this point. There are some interesting technologies being pursued right now, but there are side effects to all of them of course. That impact/benefit analysis is an important one and cannot be discounted for anything that could see widespread adoption.