I guess every ship is shipping electrons right? I don't think you can call storing chemical potential energy 'electrons'.
This is an interesting concept - I guess if electric cars make sense then this also makes sense for transporting energy?
This is an interesting concept - I guess if electric cars make sense then this also makes sense for transporting energy?
I don't see how that follows. The point of a electric car isn't to transport the electricity, it's to transport matter. There's no shortcut here: the only realistic way (short of Star Trek transporter beams) we can get the cargo from point A to point B is by physically moving it.
In contrast, we already have other ways to transport energy which work quite well. It's hard to see how this absurd concept could possibly be competitive with them.
1) Two islands exist relatively close to each other. 2) Both have enough wind power to meet demand on windy days. 3) Deep waters, strong tidal currents, tsunami risk or some combination make power lines between the islands somewhat expensive or unreliable. 4) Battery storage is required to meet demand on days with little wind. 5) Storing these batteries on ships is not significantly more expensive than storing the batteries on land. (Maybe real estate prices are high, regulations are stricter on land, etc.)
In such a case, it may be more economical to move the ship holding the batteries than to set up cables intended just for low wind periods. And if there are many islands involved, an ecosystem of ships may scale better than cables, for instance if demand is seasonal or varies for other reasons.
Basically, these are similar reasons to why LNG regasification ships exist, instead of just building fixed land-based facilites where needed.
When you charge a battery you are pushing electrons from one chamber in the battery to another. A discharged battery is like two tanks of water at equal levels, charging is like pumping water from one to the other so one has a higher level and thus potential energy.