[HN Gopher] Electric mountain: Power station that shows the beau...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Electric mountain: Power station that shows the beauty of
       infrastructure
        
       Author : elemeno
       Score  : 82 points
       Date   : 2023-11-02 11:30 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
        
       | xkekjrktllss wrote:
       | The intro paragraph is about halfway down after a mass of self-
       | indulgence. It should have been first, of course.
        
       | londons_explore wrote:
       | Not stated in the article: There are very few places in the world
       | with two large lakes, separated by a lot of height and not much
       | distance.
       | 
       | Wherever that happens, it is probably financially a good idea to
       | build one of these.
       | 
       | But that geography is really rather rare, so the rest of the
       | world will probably have to use gas peaker plants (environment-
       | killing) or battery storage (expensive).
        
         | eppp wrote:
         | There are lots of places where such things can be built though.
         | TVA's Raccoon Mountain is an example.
         | https://www.tva.com/energy/our-power-system/hydroelectric/ra...
         | 
         | There is water at the base of a lot of mountains, just knock
         | the top off and build a lake.
        
           | sambeau wrote:
           | There's really not a lot of point these days. Batteries can
           | be used for load balancing and pump-storage is very
           | inefficient.
        
             | eppp wrote:
             | We should do all of it at the same time. Diversity and over
             | provisioning is a way to have options and redundancy.
        
               | sambeau wrote:
               | The U.K. needs something like 30 TWh of storage (the
               | National Grid has 50 TWh in their plan).
               | 
               | We'd need thousands of these.
               | 
               | They're great for load balancing, especially when coupled
               | with compressed air to get them generating within
               | seconds, but we'd have to flood all the glens of Scotland
               | and Wales to make a dent in our needs.
        
             | londons_explore wrote:
             | Moss Landing, CA is the worlds largest battery. It is
             | 3.0GWh, and has been operating 2 months.
             | 
             | However, Dinorwig, UK is far larger at 9.1 GWh, and is 40
             | years old.
        
               | toomuchtodo wrote:
               | For comparison, you could build a replacement for
               | Dinorwig with less than 1 quarter (12 weeks) of Tesla's
               | single Megafactory annual output, and have it installed
               | in less than a year, in any geography (assuming you're
               | ready to run copper and pour slabs; storage enclosures
               | can be installed in parallel, it's trucks, cranes, and
               | human labor bolting them down).
               | 
               | Timelines go down as battery manufacturing scales up.
               | TBMs and mountain cutting are not getting faster or
               | cheaper.
        
               | bee_rider wrote:
               | A quarter worth of production from the Megafactory sounds
               | pretty expensive.
               | 
               | I mean somebody should make a giant battery backup, but
               | Dinorwig _does_ have a pretty big advantage in terms of
               | existing-ness.
        
               | toomuchtodo wrote:
               | Existing power stations that are paid off have an
               | advantage considering cost of capital (nuclear and pumped
               | hydro), but that advantage eventually theta decays when
               | maintenance costs exceed new build costs. France is
               | experiencing this now with its aging nuclear fleet [1].
               | Running the math on Tesla's calculator [2], a quarter
               | worth of annual production (10GWh) runs $3,798,849,522
               | (~$3.8B). That includes installation (per Tesla). Can new
               | pumped hydro be built cheaper than that? For sure, keep
               | existing low carbon generation or storage in service as
               | long as commercially reasonable.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/EDF-
               | revises-up-c...
               | 
               | [2] https://www.tesla.com/megapack/design
        
               | sambeau wrote:
               | For load balancing, these days, there's really no need
               | for giant monolithic storage projects. Every renewables
               | project can -- and should be made to -- have storage
               | built in to it. Companies leave it out as it would make
               | there price per MWh higher, and, for some reason,
               | governments let them bid without it.
               | 
               | (Add storage to offshore wind and it suddenly looks
               | similar in cost to nuclear.)
               | 
               | So, no one's suggesting replacing pump storage with giant
               | battery banks, just spreading batteries and other storage
               | across the grid.
               | 
               | We still have no technology capable of storing TWhs
               | though, and that's what we need to remove carbon from our
               | power grid.
        
               | cogman10 wrote:
               | Dinorwig cost 0.5 billion GBP to produce in 1974 (roughly
               | 1 billion pounds in today's money) and took 10 years to
               | build.
               | 
               | Nobody is arguing Dinorwig should be torn down. However,
               | it took 10 years to build dinorwig. It takes less than a
               | year to build a battery version of Dinorwig with
               | basically 0 geographic requirements. The cost would be
               | roughly comparable for a battery backup (at $200USD/kWh,
               | it'd be $1.8 billion to build a similarly sized plant. or
               | 1.4 billion GBP)
        
               | squigg wrote:
               | SSE are also hoping to build Coiri Glas in Scotland,
               | which is 30GWh https://www.sse.com/news-and-
               | views/2023/03/britain-s-largest...
               | 
               | Cruachan 2 will take total site capacity to 1GWh
               | https://www.drax.com/about-us/our-projects/cruachan-2/
        
               | sambeau wrote:
               | We need more like 30 _TWh_ of storage to secure the grid
               | without fossil fuels.
        
               | londons_explore wrote:
               | > SSE's PS100m commitment to further developing Coire
               | Glas comes as the leading low carbon energy
               | infrastructure company awaits the UK Government's
               | decision on how it intends to financially support the
               | deployment of long-duration electricity storage, as set
               | out in last year's British Energy Security Strategy.
               | 
               | > This could include the introduction by the UK
               | Government of a 'revenue stabilisation mechanism' in the
               | form of an adapted Cap and Floor scheme to support
               | investment in long-duration storage. This would also be
               | alongside broader consideration of how the electricity
               | market, including the Capacity Mechanism and the
               | Flexibility Markets, value the contribution of low carbon
               | flexible assets such as pumped storage.
               | 
               | AKA... They're waiting for a government handout before
               | they begin build. While they can 'buy low, sell high' and
               | make a lot of money, they _also_ want a government
               | guarantee that they will make that much money. Payouts
               | from that guarantee will effectively become an
               | electricity tax.
        
         | sambeau wrote:
         | Pump-storage hydro is for load balancing as it can't store
         | anything on a grid scale and is very inefficient. Sadly, it
         | could never replace gas -- the U.K. alone would need thousands.
        
           | Gud wrote:
           | It is absolutely "grid scale". Did you read the article?
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pumped-
           | storage_hydroel...
        
             | sambeau wrote:
             | It's grid-scale load balancing, not grid-scale storage.
             | Grid-scale storage is hundreds and thousands of GWh. The UK
             | needs 30-50 TWh to be secure without fossil fuels.
        
         | toomuchtodo wrote:
         | Keep an eye on Australia, Snowy 2 (whose costs are blowing out)
         | [1], and battery uptake [2]. Based on cost decline curves of
         | lithium scale utility storage, batteries will be cheaper by the
         | time Snowy is commissioned. Battery manufacturing is ramping
         | because every automaker is being forced to electrify, Tesla is
         | preparing to build a second Megafactory factory for battery
         | storage in China [3], and batteries can be installed anywhere.
         | 
         | Batteries can also provide grid support (frequency and voltage
         | support when transmission or generators trip) and can be grid
         | forming now; instead of having to follow the grid, they can
         | drive grid health, including black start [4] when the grid is
         | down. In South Australia, a new battery storage facility has
         | recently come online and is in testing to enable AEMO, the grid
         | operator, to turn down the requirement for ~70MW of constant
         | fossil gas generation for grid services [5].
         | 
         | [1] https://reneweconomy.com.au/snowy-2-much-how-can-a-2-2gw-
         | wat... ("This is the fourth time Snowy 2.0's cost has been
         | reset - from $2 billion in 2017, to $3.8-$4.5 billion later
         | that year, to $5.1 billion in 2019, to $5.9 billion in 2020, to
         | $12 billion now (2023).")
         | 
         | [2] https://www.energy-storage.news/global-bess-deployments-
         | to-e... ("Global BESS deployments to exceed 400GWh annually by
         | 2030, says Rystad Energy")
         | 
         | [3] https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-china-megafactory-
         | constructi... ("Tesla's estimated initial production capacity
         | for the China-based Megapack factory is 10,000 units per year
         | or about 40GWh.") [My note: This is equal to their existing
         | capacity in Lathrop, California]
         | 
         | [4] https://www.nrel.gov/grid/black-start.html
         | 
         | [5]
         | https://opennem.org.au/facilities/sa1/?selected=TIB&tech=bat...
         | ("Torrens Island BESS")
        
           | stephen_g wrote:
           | Of course, Snowy 2 was a political project for which the
           | planning was totally under-baked. It was a compromise set off
           | by a centrist who was lukewarmly pro-renewable energy, but
           | leading a party that was mostly dead against it and just
           | wanted the Government to pump money into expanding fossil
           | fuel ('coincidently' many of these MPs in the party have
           | direct or indirect investment and interest in coal mining
           | companies, oil and gas industry links, etc.).
           | 
           | There was always much better ways the money could have been
           | spent, like investment into offshore wind, battery banks etc.
           | but to directly invest in renewables and battery storage was
           | and is politically untenable for that party. The Government
           | has changed now to the party that doesn't have the same kind
           | of direct fossil fuel investments, but unfortunatly the
           | massive political donations from the resource industry and
           | oil & gas to our politicians is bipartisan so they talk
           | 'clean energy' while not that much actually changes...
        
             | toomuchtodo wrote:
             | Agreed, lots of inertia and it will take time to course
             | correct.
        
         | FFP999 wrote:
         | Is there any reason that "lakes" (i.e. big holes) can't be dug
         | where they would be useful for this purpose?
         | 
         | (Update: for those who are downvoting, it was a serious
         | question.)
        
           | ajb wrote:
           | Well at least one of these was originally a quarry, so yes.
           | But it would raise the cost a lot, if the excavate wasn't
           | valuable as in this case.
        
             | FFP999 wrote:
             | It'll definitely raise the cost, I acknowledge that what
             | I'm talking about isn't going to be a small project. I just
             | wouldn't necessarily assume that it would raise the cost so
             | much as to make this infeasible. To be clear, it's also not
             | like I know anything about civil or power engineering.
        
           | sambeau wrote:
           | I've seen a suggestion that you could use two spheres in the
           | sea one deep down, one near the surface.
        
             | londons_explore wrote:
             | I don't think so...
             | 
             | You would presumably be pumping air from one sphere to the
             | other.
             | 
             | That air ends up compressing/decompressing, and therefore
             | heating or getting cold. That dramatically lowers
             | efficiency.
             | 
             | And on top of that, a football stadium sized sphere full of
             | compressed air at the bottom of the ocean is going to need
             | hold-down anchors at a scale the world has never seen...
        
               | sambeau wrote:
               | > "The general idea is to have a closed vessel sitting on
               | the seafloor. Surplus energy is then used to pump water
               | out of this vessel, leaving the inside at a near-vacuum.
               | When it's desired to recover energy from the system,
               | water can be allowed to flow back into the vessel under
               | the pressure generated by the seawater above. As the
               | vessel is filled, the water flowing in turns a turbine,
               | generating electricity in just the same way as a
               | traditional pumped hydro system."
               | 
               | https://hackaday.com/2022/02/02/underwater-tanks-turn-
               | energy...
               | 
               | https://www.iee.fraunhofer.de/en/topics/stensea.html
        
           | AlexAndScripts wrote:
           | If this were the 1950s I'm sure somebody would have tried
           | nukes!
        
             | FFP999 wrote:
             | I mean, when all you have is a hammer, and also your entire
             | society is repressing massive post traumatic stress
             | disorder, everything looks like a nail.
        
           | hwillis wrote:
           | 1. The lower lake still needs to be substantially above sea
           | level and the local water table etc. so that it can actually
           | be drained and so that it doesn't just fill up with local
           | water. You can't do this by the hoover dam, since you'd also
           | have to lower the river another few dozen meters. That's more
           | challenging than it sounds, since you'd have to continue
           | digging all along its path until you reached the place that
           | the river naturally fell to that lower altitude.
           | 
           | 2. Reservoirs are very large. The lower reservoir in this
           | article is 7 million cubic meters[1]. The Hoover dam passes
           | 289 million cubic meters of water daily, with around 78.3
           | million cubic meters of that generating electricity. The
           | largest land vehicle in the world can excavate 700k cubic
           | meters per day[2].
           | 
           | [1]: https://coflein.gov.uk/en/site/423380 [2]:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overburden_Conveyor_Bridge_F60
           | 
           | 3. We _do_ dig them out- the reservoir in the article was
           | substantially enlarged. But it 's still rare to find places
           | you can actually do that.
           | 
           | 4. The upper reservoir is a totally different question. It
           | would take over 125 years to dig out a hole the size of Lake
           | Mead for the Hoover Dam. It would take almost a million of
           | the bombs used the Sedan nuclear test[3] to dig that hole.
           | 
           | [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedan_(nuclear_test)
        
             | FFP999 wrote:
             | Thanks; I guess if it were that simple, someone would have
             | done it, being as neither pumped storage nor earthmoving
             | are new technology.
        
         | cesarb wrote:
         | > There are very few places in the world with two large lakes,
         | separated by a lot of height and not much distance.
         | 
         | You only need one large lake (or a place which can be dammed to
         | create one); the other one can be completely artificial, with
         | no water inflow or outflow other than through the
         | pumps/turbines. In fact, I think it might even be possible to
         | make both reservoirs completely artificial, and fill them by
         | pumping water from somewhere else. That makes the necessary
         | geography a lot less rare; you only need the appropriate height
         | difference, and the ability to create artificial reservoirs on
         | both ends.
        
           | londons_explore wrote:
           | Yes, but large artificial lakes aren't known for being cheap.
           | 
           | Pumped storage needs _big_ lakes - a swimming pool on the top
           | of a mountain isn 't going to cut it.
        
         | bryanlarsen wrote:
         | Counterexample:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludington_Pumped_Storage_Power...
         | 
         | They only started with a single lake and a moderate amount of
         | elevation.
        
       | Dachande663 wrote:
       | I had the luck to visit this as a child, before all the tourist
       | side of it was shut down. I remember taking the bus past the
       | giant turbine hall. A few facts I can remember:
       | 
       | 1. Carol Vorderman did a lot of the engineering calculations,
       | before she started on Countdown (probably only relevant to the UK
       | lot).
       | 
       | 2. They couldn't run powerlines from the facility to the grid as
       | it's an AONB so they had to run them underground at a cost of
       | PS1M per mile for however many miles.
       | 
       | Great place along with Sellafield and the wind turbines in
       | Norfolk for a kid to visit.
        
         | Neil44 wrote:
         | Sounds like we did a similar set of school trips, I remember
         | standing in a big loud hall on top of the Sellafield reactor,
         | and down inside electric mountain by the big turbines. I was
         | most sad that they don't do tours at the moment, I wanted to
         | take my daughter there.
        
           | FFP999 wrote:
           | You may not have heard, but they had a little trouble there
           | at one point, I wouldn't take a kid there.
        
             | nicky0 wrote:
             | Are you referring to the Windscale fire of 1957, or
             | something else?
             | 
             | I remember visiting the Sellafield visitor centre as a kid
             | in the 1990s. It was great.
        
             | Neil44 wrote:
             | What are you referring to?
        
           | becurious wrote:
           | You could also visit the Wylfa nuclear plant on Anglesey. Not
           | sure when tours stopped (probably due to security) but you
           | could see the reactor. All closed now.
        
         | kraftman wrote:
         | I did this at primary school too! We had a picnic next the
         | bottom lake.
        
         | LastTrain wrote:
         | AONB = Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
        
         | squigg wrote:
         | If you are ever up in Scotland, you can still visit Cruachan -
         | the sister power station at Loch Awe with a very similar
         | design. I took my children there two months ago. They were as
         | amazed as I hoped they would be! Visiting hours here:
         | https://www.visitcruachan.co.uk/
         | 
         | If you are a Harry Potter fan, it's not far from Loch Awe to
         | the famous viaduct at Glenfinnan as well. Details here:
         | https://www.nts.org.uk/visit/places/glenfinnan-monument/high...
        
           | sambeau wrote:
           | If you are a Star Wars fan, Cruachan is the location of The
           | Empire's base in Andor.
           | 
           | As a Scot, who's done a lot of hillwalking in the past (and
           | been scared witless by airforce jets suddenly appearing over
           | the brim of a hill) it was amazing to see tie-fighters
           | whooshing across the Scottish landscape.
        
             | squigg wrote:
             | I did not know that - thank you, my son watched Andor -
             | I'll get him to show me!
        
             | dano wrote:
             | I visited Cruachan in 2019 by happenstance. It is really
             | cool! I'm going to look for the Star Wars tie in - the
             | architecture certainly does fit the theme. You can watch a
             | Pathe video on Royal Opening of the dam and power station
             | here https://www.britishpathe.com/asset/87792/
        
       | Amorymeltzer wrote:
       | I _think_ it was someone on the Volts podcast[1], either David
       | Roberts or a guest, who made the point (I 'm paraphrasing) that
       | one of the most helpful things a regular person can do is start
       | to think of solar arrays or windmills as beautiful; if building
       | them isn't "climate but eyesore" but rather a "climate and
       | beauty" proposition, they are much more likely to get built.
       | 
       | 1: https://www.volts.wtf
        
         | Mistletoe wrote:
         | When I drive through Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, etc. I think
         | windmills are quite beautiful. On the plains they are the only
         | thing to look at and are quite inspiring.
         | 
         | They look like this:
         | https://www.istockphoto.com/photos/oklahoma-wind-energy-turb...
        
       | uptownJimmy wrote:
       | Though not as technologically impressive, there are quite a few
       | rather "simple" little hydroelectric dams tucked back in the
       | Allegheny Mountains of the eastern USA. They are a marvel to see,
       | worth seeking out if you are driving anywhere near them.
       | 
       | Cheoah Dam is on the infamous Tail of the Dragon in TN, and
       | there's a spot where you can pull over and see the whole thing
       | below, it's such an inspiring thing.
        
       | uticus wrote:
       | > So, after all those television-watching Britons go to bed,
       | Dinorwig's generators are run backwards.
       | 
       | > It's a remarkably efficient process, with about 75% of the
       | energy available for reuse.
       | 
       | Not an (hardware) engineer, so wondering: are turbines typically
       | efficient running _both_ ways? Or would a turbine in this
       | scenario have tradeoffs compared to turbines that are designed
       | for running in one direction only?
       | 
       | The best I can come up with from the comfort of my armchair is
       | that straight gears are typically equally efficient in either
       | rotating direction, but often gears with angled teeth are used
       | when one rotating direction is primary.
        
         | adhesive_wombat wrote:
         | The Dinorwig turbines are (like most hydro plants) Francis
         | turbines. The blade still have an angle. Like a PC case fan,
         | the angle is the same direction whether or not the turbine is
         | "braking" or "pumping". But there very likely are tradeoffs in
         | the turbine design to keep both functions relatively efficient.
         | 
         | There are also what are called ternary sets, which are the
         | generator turbine, the torque converter (a massive clutch) and
         | a pump. A good diagram in here: https://voith.com/corp-
         | en/11_06_Broschuere-Pumped-storage_ei.... These are used at
         | another Welsh pumped storage station: Ffestiniog.
         | 
         | Helical gears (the ones with angled teeth) are used not because
         | one direction is better than the other, but because they have a
         | larger contact area and allow larger forces for a given tooth
         | size (module) and lower vibration because multiple teeth mesh
         | at any time rather than one-by-one. The angle can go either
         | way, and, indeed, can go both ways on one gear (a herringbone
         | gear) to nullify the axial loading.
        
         | bee_rider wrote:
         | It couldn't be much worse, right? Otherwise they'd have just
         | installed another turbine facing in the other direction.
        
           | uticus wrote:
           | I have no idea.
           | 
           | I can easily imagine a turbine being a good chunk of the
           | installation BOM cost and budget constraints saying price
           | recoup in x years that extra parts doesn't balance against.
           | And in this scenario, then no, another turbine facing the
           | other direction would not be an option - though it is only
           | efficient one way.
        
             | bee_rider wrote:
             | That's fair.
             | 
             | You were clearly looking for an answer from somebody who
             | knew something about the field, but I decided (for some
             | reason) to come in with, like, over simplified first
             | principles speculation. I hate it when people do what I
             | did, haha. Sorry!
        
       | ttul wrote:
       | The Kemano generating station in British Columbia was built in
       | the 1950s to supply power to an aluminum smelter. They hollowed
       | out a mountain to drop a river through turbines. It's an
       | incredible marvel of engineering.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kemano_Generating_Station
        
       | colanderman wrote:
       | Massachusetts has a pumped storage station in the Berkshires,
       | Bear Swamp. [1] As of a few years ago they had an underground
       | visitor's center with a scale model and lots of info. Not sure
       | whether it's open anymore though.
       | 
       | [1]
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear_Swamp_Hydroelectric_Power...
        
       | mindracer wrote:
       | Incredible place, while at Bangor university I did my
       | dissertation on electric mountain and now spend my weekend hiking
       | round Snowdonia. Lovely part of the world
        
         | BoxOfRain wrote:
         | I went to Aberystwyth and often went out into Snowdonia,
         | particularly Bala. It's definitely one of the prettiest parts
         | of the UK!
         | 
         | I really regret not learning Welsh while I lived in such a
         | Welsh-speaking part of Wales.
        
           | arethuza wrote:
           | I have to say that I really like the Welsh names: _Eryri_ for
           | Snowdonia and _Yr Wyddfa_ for Snowdon itself.
        
       | frantathefranta wrote:
       | Czech Republic also has a pumped-storage plant in Dlouhe
       | strane[0]. It's also in a protected landscape and in my opinion
       | looks amazing [1], especially when you descend from Praded. It's
       | one of the only large scale industrial projects in Czech Republic
       | that is on a world-class level.
       | 
       | [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dlouh%C3%A9_str%C3%A1n%C4%9B_H..
       | .
       | 
       | [1]http://turystyka.studentnews.pl/img/wo/3/58/Elektrownia-
       | wodn...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-11-02 23:01 UTC)