• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Tapping gravity energy potential. Will gravity batteries make a proper start?

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.

I think its excellent potential and glad to see real world prototypes actually being built.

Problem is the established entrenched elites won't allow it without insane profiteering for it to ever take off on a large scale keeping people poor and in need imv. I'm pretty certain it's viewed as a threat by these people.

It's too bad these types of projects were never introduced on a massive scale to which much energy needs would be fulfilled already.

But at least people are trying.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member

I think its excellent potential and glad to see real world prototypes actually being built.

Problem is the established entrenched elites won't allow it without insane profiteering for it to ever take off on a large scale keeping people poor and in need imv. I'm pretty certain it's viewed as a threat by these people.

It's too bad these types of projects were never introduced on a massive scale to which much energy needs would be fulfilled already.

But at least people are trying.
Profiteering?
Those damnable capitalists!
We must depend upon our socialist brethren & sistern
to build these glorious triumphs of the worker, Komrad!
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Profiteering?
Those damnable capitalists!
We must depend upon our socialist brethren & sistern
to build these glorious triumphs of the worker, Komrad!

I'm talking about specific elites who desire to stop projects like this because its a potentially serious threat to their profiteering.

Not capitalism of and in itself lol.
 

TheBrokenSoul

Active Member

I think its excellent potential and glad to see real world prototypes actually being built.

Problem is the established entrenched elites won't allow it without insane profiteering for it to ever take off on a large scale keeping people poor and in need imv. I'm pretty certain it's viewed as a threat by these people.

It's too bad these types of projects were never introduced on a massive scale to which much energy needs would be fulfilled already.

But at least people are trying.
A gravity battery is very simple reasoning that doesn't need anything complicated . In Piezoelectrics pressure of the piezoelectic material produces electricity .

If you for example put a cube of piezoelectric substance on thr ground then put a ''weigth'' on top , the weight is attracted through the material to the ground and will pressure the cube creating electricity .

pisseasy.jpg
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I'm talking about specific elites who desire to stop projects like this because its a potentially serious threat to their profiteering.

Not capitalism of and in itself lol.
Competition is normal in capitalism.
There are many competing technologies.
This is just another among many.
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
Competition is normal in capitalism.
There are many competing technologies.
This is just another among many.


If we wait for the unregulated free market to stop burning fossil fuel, we’ll be waiting till it all runs out; but we’ll have made 3/4 of the earth uninhabitable. Win-win for Exxon Mobil I suppose, who will finally have diversified into cleaner fuels by then.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member

I think its excellent potential and glad to see real world prototypes actually being built.

Problem is the established entrenched elites won't allow it without insane profiteering for it to ever take off on a large scale keeping people poor and in need imv. I'm pretty certain it's viewed as a threat by these people.

It's too bad these types of projects were never introduced on a massive scale to which much energy needs would be fulfilled already.

But at least people are trying.
I think this is nonsense. Why do you automatically have to layer on the lazy cynicism? (And I'm really sick of this bull about "elites" all the time. It's nearly all crap - ironically promoted by people like Trump, who is a quintessential member of the same elite he pretends to criticise. Animal Farm or what?:rolleyes: )

Everyone knows that energy storage is one of the biggest barriers to wider use of intermittent renewable sources of power, like wind and solar. Gravity is already used and has been for years, in the form of "pumped storge" hydro systems. We have one at Dinorwig in Wales: Dinorwig Power Station - Wikipedia

The use of weights in old mine shafts has also been researched : Gravity-based storage using weights in mine shafts - Integrate.

And of course grandfather clocks have used the gravity storage principle for several hundred years, so there is nothing new.

No doubt there are other systems. I don't watch videos but the system shown in the picture has the snag that you have to build a tower from which to suspend the weights. I should think using an existing mine shaft will be far less costly, and less intrusive in the landscape.

Given the dependence of electric batteries on heavy metals, some of which are only mined in a few countries, e.g. China, or Zaire, I feel quite sure that both governments and industry will want to diversify their energy storage technologies. So we can expect intense commercial competition between these technologies and many of them will have a place in the future of energy supply.

The challenge of getting new technologies off the ground is usually one of scale: the existing ones are already more optimised, so it can be hard for a new concept to be cost-competitive when it starts out. There is a role for government support at that stage, so that good new ideas do not wither.

But this is not an issue of some kind of cynical profiteering conspiracy.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
But you are still heavily reliant on fossil fuels?
But moving away.
(I now have solar panels serving all my buildings.)
Big changes don't happen over-nite. And this does
have advantages, one of which is time to evaluate
which system is best in which circumstances.
Evolutionary vs revolutionary.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
A gravity battery is very simple reasoning that doesn't need anything complicated . In Piezoelectrics pressure of the piezoelectic material produces electricity .

If you for example put a cube of piezoelectric substance on thr ground then put a ''weigth'' on top , the weight is attracted through the material to the ground and will pressure the cube creating electricity .

View attachment 57885
This is false. Piezoelectric crystals produce a voltage but not a continuous flow of current.

You will produce an initial voltage across the crystal but once that is discharged no more energy can be extracted. A simple consideration of energy shows this. As the rock settles a bit, while it compresses the crystal, it loses gravitational potential energy, converting that into electrical potential energy in the crystal. When you discharge that, the rock does not move any more, so it loses no more energy. Since energy is conserved, and not magically made out of nothing, the fact it loses no more energy means that nothing else can gain any more energy.
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
But moving away.
(I now have solar panels serving all my buildings.)
Big changes don't happen over-nite. And this does
have advantages, one of which is time to evaluate
which system is best in which circumstances.
Evolutionary vs revolutionary.


Is there any Federal or State subsidy in your part of the US, to persuade businesses or private citizens to switch to solar power?

Those sort of initiatives are, imo, the responsibility of government when faced with issue like the current climate crisis. Which is what I meant about not relying on an unregulated free market, to solve problems it helped to create.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
I think this is nonsense. Why do you automatically have to layer on the lazy cynicism? (And I'm really sick of this bull about "elites" all the time. It's nearly all crap - ironically promoted by people like Trump, who is a quintessential member of the same elite he pretends to criticise. Animal Farm or what?:rolleyes: )

Everyone knows that energy storage is one of the biggest barriers to wider use of intermittent renewable sources of power, like wind and solar. Gravity is already used and has been for years, in the form of "pumped storge" hydro systems. We have one at Dinorwig in Wales: Dinorwig Power Station - Wikipedia

The use of weights in old mine shafts has also been researched : Gravity-based storage using weights in mine shafts - Integrate.

And of course grandfather clocks have used the gravity storage principle for several hundred years, so there is nothing new.

No doubt there are other systems. I don't watch videos but the system shown in the picture has the snag that you have to build a tower from which to suspend the weights. I should think using an existing mine shaft will be far less costly, and less intrusive in the landscape.

Given the dependence of electric batteries on heavy metals, some of which are only mined in a few countries, e.g. China, or Zaire, I feel quite sure that both governments and industry will want to diversify their energy storage technologies. So we can expect intense commercial competition between these technologies and many of them will have a place in the future of energy supply.

The challenge of getting new technologies off the ground is usually one of scale: the existing ones are already more optimised, so it can be hard for a new concept to be cost-competitive when it starts out. There is a role for government support at that stage, so that good new ideas do not wither.

But this is not an issue of some kind of cynical profiteering conspiracy.

In the video, the weights are stacked to make the 'building'. The crane needs to be built, of course, but the storage is simply the stacking of the blocks.

Cute execution.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Is there any Federal or State subsidy in your part of the US, to persuade businesses or private citizens to switch to solar power?

Those sort of initiatives are, imo, the responsibility of government when faced with issue like the current climate crisis. Which is what I meant about not relying on an unregulated free market, to solve problems it helped to create.
I got 25% federal income tax credits for solar panel systems.
I favor such market based programs being part of the solutions.
 
Last edited:

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
One question I have about the design is the use of concrete. It seems that it would be better to use a denser material for the blocks: more stored energy per unit volume.

Maybe it is the cost of the blocks.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member

I think its excellent potential and glad to see real world prototypes actually being built.

Problem is the established entrenched elites won't allow it without insane profiteering for it to ever take off on a large scale keeping people poor and in need imv. I'm pretty certain it's viewed as a threat by these people.

It's too bad these types of projects were never introduced on a massive scale to which much energy needs would be fulfilled already.

But at least people are trying.
Whatever is most cost effective is going to be used. Gravity power will be useful for some. I'd like to see a version for homes and apartments. I'd like to seem some preliminary calculations about materials that might work and whether water would be dense enough to be useful or whether you'd be better off using lead weights. I wonder if you could have enough power to keep a computer going with a small home system, perhaps a narrow tower system.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
One question I have about the design is the use of concrete. It seems that it would be better to use a denser material for the blocks: more stored energy per unit volume.

Maybe it is the cost of the blocks.
What I would prefer is more independent power. Central power is efficient, but it makes us all too vulnerable to cataclysms.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
One question I have about the design is the use of concrete. It seems that it would be better to use a denser material for the blocks: more stored energy per unit volume.

Maybe it is the cost of the blocks.
Also you have to emit loads of CO2 to make concrete. Weaning ourselves off concrete is essential for the future. Far better to use stone - if you can cut the blocks using renewable electricity.
 
Top