• mriormro@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    7 months ago

    We’re much worse batteries than an actual battery and we’re exponentially more difficult to maintain.

    • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      But we self replicate and all of our systems are already in place. We’re not ideal I’d wager but we’re an available resource.

      Fossil fuels are a lot less efficient than solar energy … but we started there.

      • mriormro@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        This is a cute idea for a movie and all but it’s incredibly impractical/unsustainable. If a system required that it’s energy storage be self-replicating (for whatever reason) then you would design and fabricate that energy storage solution for that system. Not be reliant on a calorically inefficiently produced sub-system (i.e. humans).

        You literally need to grow an entire human just to store energy in it. Realistically, you’re looking at overfeeding a population with as much calorically dense, yet minimally energy intensive foodstuffs just to store energy in a material that’s less performant than paraffin wax (body fat has an energy density of about 39 MJ/kg versus paraffin wax at about 42 MJ/kg). That’s not to speak of the inefficiencies of the mixture of the storage medium (human muscle is about 5 times less energy dense than fat).

      • mriormro@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        We just tend to break a lot and require a lot of maintenance (feeding, cleaning, repairs, and containment).