dahart an hour ago

A dense battery with recharge time measured in millions of years? Be careful how quickly you discharge!

rossant 3 hours ago

Sure, though there’s a difference between extracting energy stored for millions of years and capturing the continuous flow of energy from the sun.

  • zahlman 37 minutes ago

    > Sure, though there’s a difference between extracting energy stored for millions of years and capturing the continuous flow of energy from the sun.

    The former is actually continuous, and thus far more reliable. The latter requires coming up with some other storage mechanism. Granted, we have ways to do this already. But it's still not a trivial project.

unglaublich 3 hours ago

The availability of such large amounts of energy just delays our actions to make our energy use more efficient. We burn liters of gasoline to move a single person a few kilometers. This is not efficient and only made possible by fossil fuel energy abundance (for now, it's borrowed time).

behnamoh 3 hours ago

    a dense battery with too much side effects (fumes, CO_2/etc. gases)

vs

    a less dense battery with much less side effects.

I think the choice is clear.
mlnj 3 hours ago

'Density' is not the concern we all have about fossil fuels. It's the effects on the atmosphere.

  • nandomrumber 3 hours ago

    Density is the concern we all have for solar.

    Solar is so diffuse, just bringing it to where people need it has doubled the price purely in transmission infrastructure costs.

    Reference: Australia - the place that’s supposed to be solar’s poster child has more than doubled electricity prices in the last three to four years because, unsurprisingly (we were warned), getting solar and wind to where they’re needed turns out to be incredibly expensive.

  • octopoc 3 hours ago

    I believe gp was saying that density is an advantage for fossil fuels. Nobody thinks it’s a disadvantage/problem for fossil fuels.