Any reason they’re counting energy by power?
Power tells you how large of a gap in grid capacity-vs-demand storage can cover while renewables are below peak production. That’s the important number, as long as the energy stored is sufficient to last until renewable output goes back up.
Giving an energy storage number by itself could be misleading because it seems the batteries that have been built take longer than an hour to discharge. So for example 26 GWh storage does not equal 26 GW grid capacity.
But this article, like many others does seem to be loose with the power-vs-energy metrics:
If 6,600 MW doesn’t sound like that much, consider it is enough to supply electricity to about 6.6 million homes in California for 4 hours
Maybe the implication is that the total energy storage is 26,400 MWh?
Perhaps in the same vein as what a power plant produces?
Tesla fanboys
That’s 6.6 gigawatts! Just need to get this state over 88 mph and we’ve got a chance of escaping this awful timeline.
So step 1 would be to break off California from the rest of the American continent so you don’t have to accelerate all of that?
The rest of the world always follows. It’s been weird. Catalytic converters, efficiency standards and all that.
Someone needs to get their units figured out. Storage is measured in Wh.
Storage is measured that way; discharge rate in watts.
Both need to be planned to handle peak shaving and overnight storage.
Throughout the article they’re mixing the units up. Not just the title.
Is that enough to farm a bitcoin?
Many times over.
We’d be better off if bitcoin transitioned off of proof-of-work though
