On the coasts, I think that's viable.
It's not viable where water is a valuable resource.
It's not viable where water is a valuable resource.
It uses at least an order of magnitude less water than nuclear does, per unit of electrical energy flowing through the system.
Here's an example of a system going into Nevada. 8000 MWH of capacity. Notice how tiny it is on the scale of the state.
https://www.cityofelynv.gov/pdf/CityCouncil2021/cc1-28-21/Wh...
Water use is just 500 acre-feet/year, which is tiny (Nevada's consumptive water use is 6000x this.)
The *dirt battery I have in mind would be a vertical pulley system with small dirt scoops spaced at regular intervals. The scoops would pull dirt from the bottom of the pulley system and bring the material to the top were it is dumped into a mechanically locked, very large container. Over time the container would fill up, and when that stored energy is needed the container could be unlocked, at which point it would power a clockwork of turbines on its way down.
Thoughts, critiques?
Gravitational storage only works in the very particular case of water, where moving it is downhill nearly perfectly efficient and free, and where you can also get free energy from things like rivers feeding in.
ARES Nevada is developing a 50MW GravityLine merchant energy storage facility on approximately 20 acres at Gamebird Pit, a working gravel mine in Pahrump, Nevada. This project will employ a fleet of 210 mass cars, weighing a combined 75,000 tons, operating on a closed set of 10 multi-rail tracks.