upvote

points

by fp644 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby ceejayoz4 hours ago|
next
[-]
Finland:

> The net result: Pornainen fulfilled all of its municipal climate targets with a single installation. Oil use dropped 100 percent, emissions fell 70 percent, and woodchip combustion was cut by 60 percent. According to the Mayor of the Municipality of Pornainen, Antti Kuusela, the municipality now heats all its public buildings, including a new sports arena opening in September 2026, entirely through this district heating network.

https://interestingengineering.com/energy/sand-battery-polar...

reply
upvoteby engineer_223 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
They are buying electricity and storing it as heat and time-arbitrage it to when the heat is needed, they make no mention of the electric power source. In any case, during the depth of winter, when it's needed most, they're still burning carbon. Previous paragraph to your quote:

>During the coldest, most expensive stretch, the wood chip boiler became the primary unit, and the sand battery supplemented it.

Remarkably: heat is pointed to as "wasted energy" when doing EROEI analysis and discounted, this is done to strengthen the case for Solar vs Gas.

Finland's energy mix is ~6% solar [1]... maybe it's not a larger portion of the grid supply because Finns realize it doesn't work in the winter?

[1] https://www.iea.org/countries/finland/energy-mix

reply
upvoteby adgjlsfhk13 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
going from burning fuel 12 months of the year to 3 is still a 75% cut in fuel costs and emissions
reply
upvoteby fp644 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
That's for 5000 people. And only covers heat. Happy if it can scale and move from prototype to long-term deployment at a reasonable cost, serving heavy industry in manufacturing.
reply
upvoteby ceejayoz4 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
> That's for 5000 people.

And it's quite compact.

> And only covers heat.

Is that not useful?

reply
upvoteby fp643 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Don't get me wrong, this is cool. We just have some stricter requirements on a country/state/union level that while this might help with parts, I don't see how it can easily scale up and generalize
reply
upvoteby cycomanic4 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
That doesn't really make sense, you need the ability for significant overproduction before you start thinking about storage. The other way around is just wasting money. We are just starting to get there, but still have significant fossil fuels that we can replace even by just building out solar more and just having more over production.
reply
upvoteby rwyinuse1 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
Usually there's either sun or wind. Last year 57% of Finland's electricity generation was from renewables, the rest being largely nuclear, and the electricity costs were among lowest in Europe.

Until battery tech gets (and maybe even after) it's a good idea to build some nuclear too.

reply