Skip to main content
38 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jun 30, 2023 at 12:47 comment added preferred_anon @RonJohn Oh! I didn't read that far. Upvoted.
Jun 30, 2023 at 12:27 comment added RonJohn @preferred_anon that’s the same point made by one of the answers.
Jun 30, 2023 at 9:45 comment added preferred_anon @RonJohn My point is that the question asks about storing mechanical energy, but doesn't meaningfully change anything relating to storage technology. I agree that you'd do exactly what the victorians did - you'd just run the same trains, conveyor belts, etc. with less fuel. You wouldn't run them with the same amount of fuel and store the energy in a gravity battery.
Jun 29, 2023 at 23:17 comment added RonJohn @preferred_anon "what are you going to do with it?" What teh Victorians did with it, of course.
Jun 29, 2023 at 23:15 answer added RonJohn timeline score: 1
Jun 29, 2023 at 20:03 comment added preferred_anon But... Electricity is a terrible way to store energy! Electricity is good because it's easy to convert. If you only have mechanical energy, what are you going to do with it?
Jun 29, 2023 at 2:23 comment added Cadence @J.G. Remind me not to stand anywhere near your gallium-powered steam engine, you know, because of the embrittlement...
Jun 29, 2023 at 2:01 answer added ericnutsch timeline score: 2
Jun 28, 2023 at 12:25 answer added John timeline score: 13
Jun 28, 2023 at 12:17 comment added John Store for what? we don't store energy in the same way for all purposes. since steam engines run on fuel just storing the fuel will be the most efficient.
Jun 28, 2023 at 10:15 comment added Mark Morgan Lloyd One thing not to try: phase change of perovskites etc. under extreme presssure. I idly worked through the maths with a geophysicist once, and it turns out that the energy density is surprisingly low.
Jun 28, 2023 at 8:27 comment added J.G. "Steam engines here are MUCH more efficient than those in our world. Yep, we have to violate laws of physics for this one." Or they could just use something other than water, e.g. gallium.
Jun 28, 2023 at 1:22 answer added Bill IV timeline score: 1
Jun 27, 2023 at 21:01 answer added LongFist timeline score: 2
Jun 27, 2023 at 20:29 answer added The Square-Cube Law timeline score: 7
Jun 27, 2023 at 19:28 answer added ignis volens timeline score: 5
Jun 27, 2023 at 19:17 comment added Nuclear Hoagie @causative You still might need mechanical energy storage if the turbines are generating energy from natural passive processes, like solar or water power. It's not necessarily the case that the turbine is being powered by an energy source that is already a form of energy storage like coal.
Jun 27, 2023 at 15:32 answer added Matthieu M. timeline score: 9
Jun 27, 2023 at 15:18 comment added Matthieu M. Interestingly, the race to green energy is exploring mechanical ways of storing energy, rather than batteries, because current batteries are expensive, short-lived, and "leaky"... hence the lack of electricity is not particularly a problem -- though it makes heating more difficult perhaps.
Jun 27, 2023 at 9:26 vote accept Elvagyodas
Jun 27, 2023 at 8:14 answer added biziclop timeline score: 30
Jun 27, 2023 at 7:59 history became hot network question
Jun 27, 2023 at 7:44 answer added Slarty timeline score: 4
Jun 27, 2023 at 2:23 answer added Atog timeline score: 26
Jun 27, 2023 at 1:23 comment added causative Flywheels, springs, pumping water uphill, pumping air into salt caverns. Note that flywheel or spring energy storage per kilogram is quite low compared to gasoline or batteries. The chief advantage of flywheels is speed of charging/discharging. But also if your steam engines are magically super-efficient then you should just keep the energy in the form of coal, and use the steam engine to transform it into motion when needed.
Jun 27, 2023 at 0:42 comment added Elvagyodas @Escapeddentalpatient. thanks, I've tried to make a question more narrowed and precise
Jun 27, 2023 at 0:41 history edited Elvagyodas CC BY-SA 4.0
added 18 characters in body
Jun 27, 2023 at 0:32 comment added Cadence Transfer how far? Most steam-powered, and even early electrical-powered factories were essentially self-contained, with power generated on the premises and distributed mechanically with ordinary shafts, belts, and gears. You weren't trying to conduct power halfway across the country as in modern grids.
Jun 27, 2023 at 0:32 history edited Elvagyodas CC BY-SA 4.0
added 60 characters in body; edited title
Jun 27, 2023 at 0:17 answer added jdunlop timeline score: 50
Jun 27, 2023 at 0:17 comment added Escaped dental patient. Letting us know of the amounts involved of: distance, power. Also telling us about the rest of the tech-level in your world would help a bit setting what's available to work with.
Jun 27, 2023 at 0:16 answer added Robert Rapplean timeline score: 11
Jun 27, 2023 at 0:16 comment added AlexP Modern steam engines, that is, supercritical steam turbines, are about 40% efficient. It is not particulary clear how "much more efficient" they could be... Of course, they are used to generate electric power. And anyway, the true-and-tested method of storing and transmitting energy in the age of coal was, wait for it, coal. You store the energy in the form of coal. You transport the energy in the form of coal. This is what they actually did.
Jun 27, 2023 at 0:16 comment added Escaped dental patient. Welcome Elvagyodas. You've a couple of distinct questions here (transmit and store), can you pick one. Any subsequent question can be asked in its own thread. Please edit.
Jun 27, 2023 at 0:01 history edited Elvagyodas CC BY-SA 4.0
deleted 7 characters in body
Jun 27, 2023 at 0:00 history edited Elvagyodas CC BY-SA 4.0
edited body
S Jun 26, 2023 at 23:58 review First questions
Jun 27, 2023 at 0:18
S Jun 26, 2023 at 23:58 history asked Elvagyodas CC BY-SA 4.0