Talk:Storage tank: Difference between revisions

From Official Factorio Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 4: Line 4:


: To be clear: All the mentioned advantages are storage tank specific. - Except the last one regarding trains, but that kind of transportation always results in storing in a storage tank. - -- [[User:SafwatHalaby|SafwatHalaby]] ([[User talk:SafwatHalaby|talk]]) 13:58, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
: To be clear: All the mentioned advantages are storage tank specific. - Except the last one regarding trains, but that kind of transportation always results in storing in a storage tank. - -- [[User:SafwatHalaby|SafwatHalaby]] ([[User talk:SafwatHalaby|talk]]) 13:58, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Paragraph in question:
<blockquote>There are several advantages to storing energy in storage tanks compared with storing it in an accumulator:
* The energy density of a storage tank tile is much higher than it is with accumulators.
** For 165°C steam (produced with [[boiler|boilers]]), a single storage tank stores as much as 15 accumulators: <code>750MJ / 5MJ = 150</code>
** For 500°C steam (produced using [[Heat exchanger|heat exchangers]]), a single storage tank stores as much as 48 accumulators: <code>2400MJ / 5MJ = 480</code>
* A  [[nuclear reactor]] always fully burns a fuel cell, releasing 8GJ (or more with the multiple reactor bonus) even if power demand is lower. The excess energy can be stored as steam.
* A single [[accumulator]]'s maximum discharge rate is 300kW. On a very heavy load (e.g. laser turret firing), a small accumulator array may not discharge fast enough, causing power disruptions. A steam engine can produce 900kW of energy from the stored steam (3 times faster discharge rate), and a turbine can produce 5800kW (6.4 times faster discharge rate). In other words, a number of turbines or steam engines with steam storage can cope with much higher bursts than the same number of accumulators.
* Steam can be transferred via trains and then consumed remotely via turbines or steam engines. This essentially "transports electricity" using trains.
</blockquote>

Revision as of 14:02, 14 May 2018

Regarding the revert of "steam tank as energy storage"

Could you elaborate why the steam tank advantages over accumulators does not belong on the steam tank page? -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 13:55, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

To be clear: All the mentioned advantages are storage tank specific. - Except the last one regarding trains, but that kind of transportation always results in storing in a storage tank. - -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 13:58, 14 May 2018 (UTC)


Paragraph in question:

There are several advantages to storing energy in storage tanks compared with storing it in an accumulator:

  • The energy density of a storage tank tile is much higher than it is with accumulators.
    • For 165°C steam (produced with boilers), a single storage tank stores as much as 15 accumulators: 750MJ / 5MJ = 150
    • For 500°C steam (produced using heat exchangers), a single storage tank stores as much as 48 accumulators: 2400MJ / 5MJ = 480
  • A nuclear reactor always fully burns a fuel cell, releasing 8GJ (or more with the multiple reactor bonus) even if power demand is lower. The excess energy can be stored as steam.
  • A single accumulator's maximum discharge rate is 300kW. On a very heavy load (e.g. laser turret firing), a small accumulator array may not discharge fast enough, causing power disruptions. A steam engine can produce 900kW of energy from the stored steam (3 times faster discharge rate), and a turbine can produce 5800kW (6.4 times faster discharge rate). In other words, a number of turbines or steam engines with steam storage can cope with much higher bursts than the same number of accumulators.
  • Steam can be transferred via trains and then consumed remotely via turbines or steam engines. This essentially "transports electricity" using trains.