- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Oh no. I forgot to save my document before the cloud passed
The cloud givith and the cloud taketh
They don’t literally mean no batteries. They just mean small batteries. The 50Wh battery in my (modern, efficient) laptop lasts about 18 hours for example.
You’d also have battery powered lighting.
The real challenge is heating and cooling. If you want to be able to keep your house a comfortable temperature, your food cool in the fridge, your food hot when you eat it… that’s not easy to do with small batteries. But it can be done, e.g. with good insulation and by changing your habits a little (cook during the day, etc).
You can also, as it says in the article, use “non battery” storage. We already do that. For example lots of people keep hundreds of litres of hot water next to their house. That hot water can be used, for example, to keep warm overnight. You can also fill empty air space in your fridge with water - unlike air, which is instantly replaced with warm air every time you open the door, the cold water will stay in the fridge and help the fridge stay cold much much longer. Easily overnight.
Of course, you could also just use gas for all of that… but if one of your motivations is to avoid carbon emissions then that’s off the table.
Um, I’m pretty sure that laptop has at least two batteries….
this sounds like a comment you’re making based entirely off of the thumbnail; i would strongly encourage you to actually read the article if so
Did you read the article? It says he uses it to run his laptop and other electronics (such as charging a phone).
yes, i literally posted it. the article’s context makes it pretty obvious that “Off-Grid Without Batteries” refers to off the power grid (because you’re receiving direct solar energy) without batteries for holding your solar panel’s energy (because those are carbon intensive and expensive), hence i don’t know what the purpose of your comment is and it appears entirely derived from reading the headline and thumbnail alone.
The author’s solution essentially uses the batteries in the devices themselves to hold the energy.
Their point about power tool usage is a good one, except that they don’t discuss solar power surplus, which can be an issue.
But changing mindset to using electricity while it’s available instead of always assuming there will be a surplus of energy is a good one. The overall piece just seems a bit oversimplified.
like, to be clear: the scope of the article is laid out by those qualifiers, so naturally it’s not going to prescribe how to get rid of in-built batteries in consumer electronics since they fall outside of that scope. even so, it addressed the quibble you’re getting at here pretty bluntly, i think:
Of course, outsourcing chemical energy storage to the device is not the most sustainable option. The production of lithium-ion batteries requires fossil fuels, and (unlike lead-acid batteries) they are not recycled. The best solution, of course, is to reduce the use of electrical devices. But charging them with direct solar energy is a lot more sustainable and efficient than via other batteries or a fossil-fueled electricity grid. If we use high-tech devices, then preferably in the smartest way possible.
and Low-Tech Magazine has previously covered alternatives to battery technology in other posts. so i’m just not seeing what the objection here is.
This is really cool!
A lot of great ideas in here for sure! Better insulation is a great way to store energy without the need for large battery systems. This kind of thinking can also translate really well to more traditional housing.
We already do this kind of thing with standard water heaters in the US, and creating better insulated chest freezers and refrigerators should be straightforward. The cooker seems fairly novel, though.
On a larger scale, Passive Haus construction techniques can go a long way to reducing energy needs for climate control, and would make it easier to turn off climate systems when the sun goes down.
I feel like a better solution is a better “battery”: have the solar cells put any excess energy generated into running a water pump that pumps water into a large reservoir. That water can then turn a turbine on its way back down before being used for other purposes. It’s going to have efficiency losses, but that energy would have been fully lost with the direct solar solution.
what a cool article and website
