Talk:Energy storage

message: Sterlinda wrote on the main page: (...but this page should not be merged to that one and removed inasmuch as there are energy storage modalities that are independent of the grid) --Heron 19:59, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

message: I put a discussion comment at Talk:Grid energy storage Mackerm 05:30, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This is a very small stub on a very huge topic and I wonder if it's possible to say anything useful in this article. Even if we confine it to energy stored for human use, the article should talk about mechanical storage, chemical energy storage, electrostatic storage, transport of stored energy from place to place, considerations in applying energy storage mechanisms to particular problems...and so on. --Wtshymanski 17:32, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: More than electrical energy storage

message: What about clockwork storage/falling weight?  Crimson30 04:34, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Or winding a clock, storing energy in a spring? This article is a poorly worded version of grid energy storage. Anything related to grid energy storage should be moved to that article, leaving this article as a more universal explanation of the physics of energy storage. 199.125.109.37 19:00, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gravity 

message: I am not sure why someone is splitting off thermal, which is a form of kinetic energy, and electrical, which is a form of potential energy, from simply stating that all energy is either potential or kinetic. 199.125.109.46 (talk) 17:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Types of energy

message: Please look at following images:
thumb|right|150px
thumb|right|150px
These mention the storage of energy trough mass;
this could be mentioned in the article  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.243.183.41 (talk) 09:37, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Mass-based storage

message: are steam accumulators the only type of steam storage that exist ? Check out http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/19440/page1/ not sure what is used there  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.66.49.74 (talk) 15:24, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Steam storage

message: Add this line:
Some energy sources have a higher energy value, meaning that more energy could potentially be extracted. Fuel types however, need a specific engine to extract their energy; of which some are highly inefficient, thus meaning that selecting a more energetic fuel does not always allow you to  use more power. 
Also, a table showing the energetic values for each energy source /1l could be handy. It would be best to make seperate article  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.182.192.180 (talk) 07:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Energy usability 

message: It looks like it was thrown together by some kid in highschool or something. If we can't find a more professional resource for boron's use in energy storage, it shoudn't be in the article.
38.113.0.254 (talk) 18:49, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source 13 (the one for boron as energy storage) sucks 

message: It would be useful to include a theoretical and empirical comparison of storage losses and conversion efficiencies of the various storage media.  For example Electricity to Pumped Hydro Storage and back to Hydro-Electricity: how much energy is lost in the round-trip?  I've yet to find a credible reference that is also exhaustive. 41.241.7.171 (talk) 13:19, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Storage Losses and Conversion Efficiencies 

message: These aren't described, please include, see Water-activated_battery
91.182.45.110 (talk) 07:48, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Water-activated battery

message: Suggest addition of mention/link to the article
on the Sodium-sulfur battery:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium-sulfur_battery
already in use & development at industrial scales, and 
with significant advantages in energy density and 
constant charge/discharge rates. 
J Park (talk) 12:03, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sodium-sulfur battery 

message: In the introduction of the article, it states that food is made from the same process as fossil fuels, but that's not true. Food is a producer or consumer that has not yet been decomposed. Fossil fuels are organisms that never decompose but go through burial and compaction and then fossil fuel formation (2 entirely distinct processes that food never goes through, unless for some reason oil or coal is considered food).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikigold96 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect Fact

message: Please see this February 2012 peer reviewed literature review. —Cupco 19:29, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Underground compressed air is being taken very seriously 

message: Can anyone tell if this is anything more than a guy in a garage? They claim 70% efficiency, which seems better than compressed air typically, but that figure certainly isn't peer reviewed. —Cupco 21:38, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: See http://www.dearmanengine.com/ for where he's got to now. 85.210.170.156 (talk) 09:24, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liquid cryogenic air 

message: This section should not be placed in "Storage methods" because it's not one. Pi.r (talk) 12:33, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renewable energy storage 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Energy storage's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "RSC":
From Grid energy storage: 
From Seasonal thermal energy storage: 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 12:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Energy storage]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Energy storage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150428014820/http://www.naturalhy.net/docs/Naturalhy_Brochure.pdf to http://www.naturalhy.net/docs/Naturalhy_Brochure.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:34, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It seems that the reference for the claim that Norway has 25-30 GW pumped storage doesn't support the claim. Rather, the reference says:
"the current total capacity for electricity production in Norway is between 25-30
GW." According to http://lvk.no/LVK/Fagomrader/Vannkraftproduksjon/Nokkeltall---Oversikt-over-konsesjonssystemet-for it is 30 960 MW, so this is accurate. That does not imply that the pumped storage capacity is of that order though. Actually, I don't know what it is even though I've been trying to follow that. I have seen it being said that it would be quite straightforward to establish 20 GW pumped storage capacity, but I doubt much has been installed as of now.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kjetil Kjernsmo (talk • contribs) 13:59, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the sources, Norway gets almost all its power from hydroelectricity, which can be readily adapted to pumped storage. So the text is not incorrect.--agr (talk) 17:55, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Energy storage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110218021125/http://www.stratosolar.com/ to http://www.stratosolar.com/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.freep.com/money/autonews/aircar18_20040318.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:45, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Energy storage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110516084534/http://www.xtrac.com/pdfs/Torotrak_Xtrac_CVT.pdf to http://www.xtrac.com/pdfs/Torotrak_Xtrac_CVT.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100710052927/http://www.pddnet.com/article-next-gen-of-flywheel-energy-storage/ to http://www.pddnet.com/article-next-gen-of-flywheel-energy-storage/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100326100309/http://www.calmac.com/whatsnew/a6maccracken1.pdf to http://www.calmac.com/whatsnew/a6maccracken1.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304030520/http://www.districtenergy.org/assets/pdfs/2011Annual_Conf/Proceedings/A24WONG-v03.pdf to http://www.districtenergy.org/assets/pdfs/2011Annual_Conf/Proceedings/A24WONG-v03.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.hyunder.eu/images/Deliverables/D3.3_Benchmarking%20of%20selected%20storage%20options.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.hyunder.eu/images/Presentations%20EUSEW/2%20HyUnder%20EUSEW%20workshop%20Luis%20Correas.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120905193845/http://www.duke.edu/~cy42/PHS.pdf to http://www.duke.edu/~cy42/PHS.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140512214955/http://www.zsw-bw.de/en/topics/batteries-and-supercapacitors/produktionsforschung.html to http://www.zsw-bw.de/en/topics/batteries-and-supercapacitors/produktionsforschung.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:04, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Energy storage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130623101014/http://www.elton-cap.com/products/capacitor-cells/ to http://www.elton-cap.com/products/capacitor-cells/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140407064054/http://www.heco.com/portal/site/heco/menuitem.508576f78baa14340b4c0610c510b1ca/?vgnextoid=94600420af0db110VgnVCM1000005c011bacRCRD&vgnextchannel=ab020420af0db110VgnVCM1000005c011bacRCRD&vgnextfmt=default&vgnextrefresh=1&level=0&ct=article to http://www.heco.com/portal/site/heco/menuitem.508576f78baa14340b4c0610c510b1ca/?vgnextoid=94600420af0db110VgnVCM1000005c011bacRCRD&vgnextchannel=ab020420af0db110VgnVCM1000005c011bacRCRD&vgnextfmt=default&vgnextrefresh=1&level=0&ct=article
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160730110344/http://www.ieawind.org/wnd_info/KWEA_pdf/Oprisan_KWEA_.pdf to http://www.ieawind.org/wnd_info/KWEA_pdf/Oprisan_KWEA_.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:08, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: I'm proposing that the article Outline of energy storage is merged here. The outline article is basically a subset of the list of types of energy storage already in this article. It doesn't add anything that isn't already here, or should be here. It seems unnecessary. Railfan23 (talk) 15:49, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of Outline of energy storage 

message: Unless I haven't found the specific WP article on battery theoretical limits, it would seem appropriate to add such a section. See: https://thebulletin.org/2009/01/the-limits-of-energy-storage-technology/
"The maximum theoretical potential of advanced lithium-ion batteries that haven’t yet been demonstrated to work is still only about 6 percent of crude oil."
"This means hydrocarbons–including both fossil carbon and biofuels–are still a factor of 10 better than the physical upper bound, and they’re likely to be 25 times better than lithium batteries will ever be."
"The bottom line is that nature has given us hydrocarbons in the form of fossil carbon and biomass, and their energy-mass and energy-volume densities are superior to the thermodynamic limits of nearly all conceivable alternatives."
Charles Juvon (talk) 19:34, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Theoretical Limits 

message: it looks like you forgot to fill in the reference "IEE Conference Publication 2019". -- Fyrael (talk) 20:54, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , thank you, I went to correct but another editor beat me to it. I had mistyped "IEEE Conference Publication 2019" as "IEE Conference Publication 2019" (forgetting the last "E"), causing the undefined reference error. Elysia (AR) (talk) 14:04, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing IEE ref 

message: What about a nuclear storage?
https://www.utilitydive.com/news/nuclear-energy-storage-advanced-reactor-developers-trying-to-expand-nuclea/573570/ Grillofrances (talk) 04:31, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That isn't nuclear storage (and it's debatable if such a thing as "nuclear storage" actually exists), that's thermal energy storage as mentioned already in the article, specifically the molten salt version. Esoteric bearcat (talk) 23:46, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that calling it "nuclear storage" is very misleading. @Esoteric bearcat Digital27 (talk) 02:15, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nuclear storage 

message: The article is missing the distinction between short-duration & long-duration energy storage.  
The sorts of technologies that work best for short-duration energy storage (huge Li-ion battery banks, etc.) than what works well for long-duration energy storage (like pumped hydro, etc.).
The article would be improved if we could explicate the distinction.  N2e (talk) 23:44, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is missing the distinction between short-term & long-term energy storage 

message: The sources cited do not support the following claim:
Green hydrogen, from electrolysis of water, is a more economical means of long-term renewable energy storage in terms of capital expenditures than pumped-storage hydroelectricity or batteries.
Chino-Catane (talk) 17:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  failed verifications 

message: The following has been moved from Article:
"The electrical energy needed to generate one kg of hydrogen is 51 kWh (using an electrolyzer efficiency of 65%). At $0.03/kWh, a common off-peak high-voltage line rate in the United States, hydrogen costs $1.50 per kilogram for the electricity, equivalent to $1.50/gallon for gasoline. Other costs include the electrolyzer plant, hydrogen compressors or liquefaction, storage and transportation."
This back of the envelope estimating lacks proper sourcing. It is incomplete in that it fails to provide estimates for all other costs associated with hydrogen fuel at the pump. Chino-Catane (talk) 00:37, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  hydrogen