bookmark_borderGreen Energy Storage: The Sand Battery

by Daniel Brouse

One of the main problems with solar and wind energy is storage. They are great for making electricity when the sun is out or the wind is blowing, but how can you store energy for dark windless nights in the cold of winter of the heat of summer? Neither lead acid nor lithium batteries offer the ability to store electricity on an industrial scale. For applications like the power grid, we need much better and environmentally friendly storage.

The most efficient alternative batteries are based on membrane technology. My favorite is the membrane based battery that can be 100% efficient and never losses it’s ability to hold a charge. There are quite a few other battery types that do not involve mining or exploitation of natural resources. These include underwater bladders that solar electricity pumps up when the sun is out. Then, air is let out to turn turbines when batteries are needed. Another method is buried rocks that are heated up by solar during the sunlight and geothermal energy is used for batteries.

The most practical alternative battery that is currently in use is the sand battery. The battery uses low-grade sand and is charged up with heat made from from solar or wind electricity. The sand stores the heat near 932 degrees Fahrenheit.

“Whenever there’s like this high surge of available green electricity, we want to be able to get it into the storage really quickly,” says Markku Ylönen, one of the founders of Polar Night Energy who have developed a sand battery.

Battery scientist and climate change expert Sidd Mukherjee says, “It’s a heat store… nice and simple. You can get better by using a phase change material like Glauber’s salt, but at the expense of more complexity. Sand is nice and simple. So is water.”

How a sand battery works.
How a sand battery works.

What about solar energy? Can’t we use solar for everything?

How to go net zero now. Free and easy. Save thousands. Save the planet.

The Human Induced Climate Change Experiment

bookmark_borderHope Versus Climate Change

Global warming is a huge problem; however, we can make it much worse if we keep burning fossil carbon and killing ecosystems.

The hopeful bit is that:

  1. Coal is dead. The US energy information administration confirms coal production is declining across the country. Greenpeace reports that globally “coal is in terminal decline.”
  2. Solar and battery cost and efficiencies already make sense, so much so that utilities must embrace them or die.
  3. Electric cars are coming faster than we imagine.
  4. Nearly 200 countries have signed-on to the Paris Agreement. The aim of the agreement is:
      1. Holding the increase in the global average temperature, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change;
      2. Increasing the ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change and foster climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions development, in a manner that does not threaten food production;
      3. Making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development.

    “Countries furthermore aim to reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible.”

  5. If we do all this and more, we might save East Antarctica (which is another 150-200 feet of sea level rise over Greenland and West Antarctica melt of 30 feet SLR or so. Many species that are probably crucial to our survival could be saved.)

As for hope, it was said in another war, “It is not necessary to hope, in order to persevere.”

By Sidd Mukherjee and Daniel Brouse 2016

The Human Induced Climate Change Experiment