The Weekend Wonk: Tesla Leads Energy Storage Down the Cost Curve

May 28, 2021

Above, CNBC on Tesla and other’s aggressive moves in energy storage.

Below, Jonathan Koomey on how batteries are competing with natural gas, first by disrupting expensive “peaking units” – exactly the path solar followed 10 years ago.

6 Responses to “The Weekend Wonk: Tesla Leads Energy Storage Down the Cost Curve”

  1. Physicist and energy analyst, Mark Mills, has a quite different assessment:

    The IEA assembled a large body of data about a central, and until now largely ignored, aspect of the energy transition: It requires mining industries and infrastructure that don’t exist. Wind, solar and battery technologies are built from an array of “energy transition minerals,” or ETMs, that must be mined and processed. The IEA finds that with a global energy transition like the one President Biden envisions, demand for key minerals such as lithium, graphite, nickel and rare-earth metals would explode, rising by 4,200%, 2,500%, 1,900% and 700%, respectively, by 2040.

    The world doesn’t have the capacity to meet such demand. As the IEA observes, albeit in cautious bureaucratese, there are no plans to fund and build the necessary mines and refineries. The supply of ETMs is entirely aspirational. And if it were pursued at the quantities dictated by the goals of the energy transition, the world would face daunting environmental, economic and social challenges, along with geopolitical risks.

    • rhymeswithgoalie Says:

      Do you know how many natural landscapes have been despoiled for fossil fuel extraction over the last 150 years.

      Can you guess how much blood and treasure the US alone has spent protecting and acquiring access to oil (for private profit and “national security), starting with the US military protection of Standard Oil in China in the 1890s?

      Even these days we’re playing war games with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard boats in the Strait of Hormuz.

      I am never going to pay attention to anyone in the Wall Street fucking Journal whine about anything not being clean and green after all the support they’ve given to petrochemical industries for the past 130 years.

    • rhymeswithgoalie Says:

      Just looked up the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research: Basically, take any position that favors US corporations over US citizens’ health and civil rights and you have guessed the position of the MIPR.

  2. indy222 Says:

    One of the ideas is to “strip mine” the abyssal plains of the oceans for what we used to call “manganese nodules” but which have other metals besides manganese. The carbon held in those sediments then gets mobilized and becomes “unsequestered” in the process, and ecosystems are wrecked as well.

    Solar and wind are highly energy-dilute in their arrival, and the costs in overcoming that fact keep getting glossed over. Our goal, I once thought, was to Save the Earth, meaning our fellow species and the climate they evolved in. But now I see – no. It’s just to exploit another card in the Energy Deck and make way for yet further faster growth for the only species that matters – Home Sapiens. To hell with what it does to any other species, or future generations who will inherit the wreckage.

    • rhymeswithgoalie Says:

      How do the sediments at >2,000m get “unsequestered” into the atmospheric carbon cycle?

  3. Brent Jensen-Schmidt Says:

    Two very depressing posts above. Can add a few and dispute others but cannot be bothered having hypothetical bumfights.
    Let us not give in to excuses for inaction. Not defeated until we surrender!

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: