Posted by The Natural Philosopher on December 7, 2008, 4:14 pm
John Nagelson wrote:
do the sums, and you will find the answers you want are pretty obvious.
Posted by Dave Liquorice on December 7, 2008, 4:48 pm
On Sun, 7 Dec 2008 07:31:41 -0800 (PST), John Nagelson wrote:
If you have the space pumped storage might get you a bit of energy but
you'd probably get <50% back.
Probably best just to dump any electricity you have no immediate need for
into a heat store/bank via emersion heaters, once the store is up to
temperature sell the excess to the grid.
Posted by David Hansen on December 7, 2008, 5:37 pm
On Sun, 07 Dec 2008 16:48:40 +0000 (GMT) someone who may be "Dave
<http://www.fhc.co.uk/dinorwig.htm> has figures.
For each unit the pump input is 275 * 7 = 1925MWH
The respective generator output is 288 * 5 = 1440MWH
This is for a full fill and then depletion of the top reservoir.
In other words just under 75% of the energy put in is got back out
again. This does ignore station loads, but these are relatively
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
Posted by Derek Geldard on December 9, 2008, 6:26 pm
On Sun, 07 Dec 2008 17:37:35 +0000, David Hansen
<Mode = England & Wales>
It's good is that.
We should have built another 50.
I suppose there must be reason why we didn't.
Posted by The Natural Philosopher on December 9, 2008, 7:41 pm
Derek Geldard wrote:
Lack of suitable sites mainly.
At Dinorwig, Nature has done most of the construction already..
Plus later on a gar powered station to handle peak demand was chap and
simple..till gas ran out..