Dope Tech Episode 2

<<@EEVblog says : Holy market capitalisation Batman! I had no idea they were a listed company. I thought they'd just wither away and die a quick death. Now this boondoggle is going to drag on for years!>> <<@Rorex99 says : I think technology will be feasible using abandoned mines. This dramatically reduces infrastructure costs.>> <<@DC-em9qt says : The Chinese in collaboration with Energy Vault did it, they built the commercial version of it 😮>> <<@Aikisbest says : At this point Im suprised they didnt do something even stupider, like renaming it U-Crane or something.>> <<@key2010 says : man, i love money laundering.>> <<@CarlSmith-p2c says : As of 17 December 2025, the stock value of Energy Vault (NYSE: NRGV) is sitting around $4.70 a share. This is slightly over a 50% loss of value in 5 years. So if someone invested $10,000 in the stock 5 years ago, the value of that investment is sitting at just below $5,000.>> <<@FizzleFX says : 16:00 anyone seen the movie *CUBE* ... - this is what this is.>> <<@msxcytb says : The thing becomes more ridiculous when realizing that 1ton of coal is about 8MWh of thermal energy stored.>> <<@TJIconer says : 2025: now it has a marktvalue of100 mio. 😂😂😂>> <<@ELXatrix says : those blocks in an abandoned mineshaft might at least help with picking them up as thers less wind...oh and those water towers...they are there in quite a few places...im sure theres a pump to feed them...only thing missing is a turbine...that would be quite a bit cheaper...>> <<@gabrielhidasy says : You can carry more energy than that stores in a small backpack with batteries, or a small cup with gas.>> <<@deepdigger-c6k says : Nature showed mankind the way. Nature saved up it's energy for millions of years waiting for us to use it. Now we must do the same. Collect it and save it in our energy piggie bank. The value of that energy will increase over time. Turn large oil storage areas (Huge Tanks Of petroleum products) into Gravity Storage Installations.>> <<@deepdigger-c6k says : This is the best way to save energy for many reasons. They can be constructed in fully charged position and if the modular design accommodates there is room for scaling as needs change. China and Texas both have projects underway. America has an advantage because they have a glut of Lead (Pb) water piping.>> <<@kogibankole says : its a short sqeeze folks>> <<@fazergazer says : I conceived of a concept analogous to Energy Vault. When I was in kindergarten. By the time is was in 2nd grade, I realized hydroelectric dams accomplished the same thing. Seriously, this is so disheartening that adults would get bamboozled into supporting such a concept to the tune of $2B.>> <<@McMoose279 says : As a software developer who works with mechanical and electrical engineers, this is a classic case. Me: "Okay, how is this supposed to work?" Them: "Oh we figured that the software would make all that happen.">> <<@bunnykiller says : Ive got a better idea.... 2 mine shafts, one filled with water, both connected at the bottom with a water tight transfer tube. A sphere is filled with water and allowed to decend into the waterless mine shaft for energy production, the sphere is moved into the cross over tube and sealed, then the sphere is emptied of water, the transfer tube is then filled with water from the mineshaft with water, the door is then opened on the water filled shaft and the air filled sphere then floats to the top of the shaft, it is then hooked up to a cable and filled with water and moved to the "air" shaft and resent down the shaft producing energy... so in effect, very little energy is used to lift the sphere, the water is reused over and over again.>> <<@AllToDevNull says : Thunderf00t BUSTED: 2 years later https://youtu.be/trA5s2iGj2A?si=J8a-mPWpBvJTsDgv&t=1225>> <<@me_at_blue_sky says : Just another gravity battery waiting to be debunked: https://youtu.be/oCv3ygvEjFo?feature=shared>> <<@g3ff01 says : It has electrolytes in it, isn't it? :)>> <<@trailblazer7108 says : What do you think of energy dome?>> <<@Robin-bq4pt says : 9.81 not 10 🥲>> <<@iivin4233 says : Water has to be pumped into water towers for distribution anyway. Is that not already pumped storage? This process doesn't need to generate electricity if it accomplishes the task of distributing water by itself. The energy stored is the water pumped that is up during peak production hours. That same water flowing down into houses is the work accomplished with the water's stored energy.>> <<@nealanthony3482 says : A coal mine is dug to be used for exactly 1 hour or until the coal is removed. If we dug mines for this solution, it could be used for 100 years.>> <<@nealanthony3482 says : This is a very good idea. They just need something more dense and heavy than cement . Iron ore is 300% heavier than cement. Remember those 1,500 oil tankers floating around the world? Well, we no longer need them. Melt them down to 15 ton blocks, and we have an energy storage device for the next 50 years. (Or until fusion works)>> <<@KarimY-119 says : why not pumping molten lead instead or mercury ;)>> <<@veganbutcherhackepeter says : I'm starting a new energy company, too. The concept is feeding regenerative energy into paddles in a farm of water pools where they will create artificial waves. These will run through turbines to create electricity which will then be used to power cranes that lift and stack sacks of manure half a mile high. When needed, the sacks of manure will be dropped towards the ground powering dynamos. My revolutionary techbro invention will create biogas, fertilizer and electricity _all at the same time_ I am calling it the HYPERCRAPULATOR!>> <<@migotauerredpilladometedor4818 says : that is the problem with capitalism. It allows stupid rich people to materialize their dumb ideas and waste labor and earths finite resources, while smart poor people cant do anything>> <<@jeffhunt367 says : Its a front for the investors>> <<@huidhoofd4886 says : You're absolutely right. I worked for an electricity producing company for 17 years. If anyone gets to build pumped storage power station, I'll invest. Due to fluctuating electricity prices during the day and very low demand at night, and high prices at peak hours, it"s a money making machine with very little maintenance needed.>> <<@6teeth318-w5k says : Always has to be 10 times cheaper, 10 times faster, 10 times more efficiant. Why the number, 10. ? Numbers, like, 4 times cheaper, 2 1/2 times better, 3 times faster would saund more believable. Next year Gadget, next year.>> <<@WarwickAvgur says : and he didn't short it??!>> <<@AlldaylongRock says : Re-watching as i picked up a newsopropaganda piece about these guys building a plant in Australia 😂>> <<@randomoldbloke says : It has been reinvented yet again , this time using a old mine shaft 400m deep, lots of tax write off money i be thinking>> <<@csnipper524 says : It's mind boggling that facts and reality are the hardest things to get people to believe. They choose to instead believe fantasy and lies.>> <<@rayannott says : The energy required to boil one kg of water is not 2 million Joules. If you want to heat 1kg of water up from 20C to 100C (i.e. "to bring it to boil") then it's E = 4,200 [Jl/(kg*C)] * 1 [kg] * (100-20) [C] = 336,000 Jl. It's true if you meant "to boil away" then it's an additional E_boil_away = 2,257,000 Jl/kg * 1 [kg] = 2,257,000 Jl. So, indeed, 1 kg of 20C water needs >2.5 million Joules of energy to be boiled away.>> <<@hubertcumberdale8175 says : Dumb to only count the height as 4 blocks high. More reasonable assumption would be say 200 meters high. Then we get a more reasonable 40 MJ, which if you could spread it over an hour would be basically 11 kwh per block going up and down 200 meters, everything else kept the same from your dumb calculation>> <<@davidwatson7604 says : Algo boost! Elo muh!!! Lana Del Rey Lana Del Rey>> <<@decay-c7z says : Imagine building that huge "resilience center" with hundreds of engines to move all these blocks around simultaneously because it's more fluid. Fluid is more fluid. It's just like trying to move every molecule of water individually instead of pumping it. If you really want to do it with your beloved concrete, you could crush all these nice looking blocks, put the gravel on a conveyor belt running up a hill with excess energy, unload on a big pile of dirt and run it down the hill with recuperation and it would be more efficient and scalable. And of course more fluid.>> <<@PeterZeller2010 says : Excellent!!!! I came to the same conclusion!>> <<@SimonMester says : I like to check on these companies every now and then. They are still 'alive'. Stock down 84% to date. Not far off from death now.>> <<@RecOgMission says : Hello. I find your videos really informative and (this is a compliment) almost depressingly based in reality. Have you looked into "heating bricks to store energy" (specifically Rondo Energy). I saw a video on that today, and it wasn't this "smooth CGI, new face of the future" kind of hype that immediately raises flags. I'd love to get your view on it.>> <<@dochnichtmeineemailkacktube says : its not a 2bn dollar company anymore>> <<@ProjectEchoshadow says : I would have used a water tower and a water pump and some turbines for hydropower. I get this isn’t an efficient solution but it is a solution that should avoid like half of the issues in this design>> <<@JabelldiMarco says : ...everyday an idiot is born and easily parted from his money. Or are we looking at a money laundering scheme here?>> <<@andyharman3022 says : So their initial design of using fancy compound construction cranes proved totally unworkable. Then they very intelligently pivoted to reinvent the industrial inventory stacker.>> <<@sparky4878 says : I don't know if already mentioned. But I assume thunderf00t's calculations are based on just letting gravity do all the work and the bricks drop whatever height it was. But surely the system would have to employ some form of brake, otherwise the bricks just slam into the ground. So the force of gravity is reduced, lowering the energy generated. Unless they had some form of regenerative braking system to harvest. But is all moot anyway, as proven here it's a nonsense plan anyway.>> <<@johndoe-fd7rd says : If we dig a hole around the structure, we can store twice as much energy!!>> <<@myriaddsystems says : Megajoules>> <<@vincentrobinette1507 says : You would have to drop a 3.671 tonne block 100 meters, for 1 kWh of stored energy. If those blocks indeed weigh 20 tonnes, they need to raise up 18.36 meters, to store 1 kWh of potential energy. Assuming the efficiency of the winches is 95%, you would need to raise it to just over 19.3 meters. The total round trip efficiency would be ~90.25%. (I'm being generous) Not quite as good as a battery, but, better than pumped hydro, compressed air energy storage, and competitive with flywheel energy storage. The good thing...No standby loss. The bad things would be the sheer mass and size! The "big box' building seems more plausible, because I would be very impressed, if they could get the crane system to store even 1 megawatt hour, about 1/3 the capacity of a container size Tesla "Megapack". At least with the building, there's some potential to drop each block the full distance, getting the maximum energy out of the total movable mass. For an average 100 megawatt hour plant, you need 100,000 times what I just said. Such a facility is going to be big, it's going to be massive!`>>