Electric energy

[orzelek]

3) Solar power 3 good. There are no cloudy days or eclipses or anything like that which alter the reliability of solar panels. They work all day every day and there is no need to have a backup power source.

This is the only issue with base game power. Solar and the storage for solar is basically cheating. There are no moving parts, no maintenance, no resources to gather, and is 100% reliable. Power generation is a bit of a letdown because the entire rest of the game is about moving parts and factories and automation, but the process of generating infinite power is simply click for panel, click for accumulator, enjoy 42kw until the end of time.

Agreed
Compared to the rest of the game solar panels are just too easy. If nuclear power was added, then there would be room to reduce the effectiveness of solar panels to something more realistic and balanced. Night-time could be extended, cloudy/stormy weather could be added, and solar could be relegated to it's proper place: as only a backup source to take the load off your other power plants.

If you would be going in that direction then two more things would be missing:
1. Wind power - it's quite frequently used and would match up nicely with proposed terrain height (only effective at high terrain).
2. Something akin to current pump hydro plants - they are currently used for energy storage in large quantities. It can be simulated in game now with storing hot water but we are missing electrically heated water to be able to store energy at peak into water.

[ssilk]

...we are missing electrically heated water to be able to store energy at peak into water.

Small note:
There is a mod for that https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... 93&t=13381 Electric boiler

[Rwn]

A relatively simple suggestion to make power management a little bit deeper. Also heavily based on real challenges faced in the power industry.

Currently, managing power is very straightforward : build a lot of coal-based steam engines (boilers and steam engines should be merged by the way, currently there's little point in having two different items whose sole purpose is to work together), always with far more power generation capacity than your consumption, then add accumulators to face power spikes due to laser turrets, then build huge layers of solar panels that take precedence over boilers to save on fuel and reduce pollution during the day (and if you're good, during the night too).

What I suggest is to add a property to power generation engines : flexibility. This property reflects the fact that power generation is not always reactive enough to match changes in consumption. To keep things simple (we don't want to mess with slopes in power generation), flexibility would be a scale between 0 and 100% and represent how much of the maximum power output of the engine is actually flexible.

Say the current steam engines have a 10% flexibility, with a 510kW generation capacity, this would means that 51 kW is flexible and 459kW is not. When the engine is supplied with fuel, it has to generate at least 459kW, then, depending on the consumption, it will generate anything between 459 and 510kW (instead of anything between 0 and 510kW as currently).

How would that affect gameplay?
- First it means that brainlessly building lots of boilers will make them eat far more fuel than necessary, even if you don't use up the power they generate. So it's something you can safely ignore early on or if you discover the game. But if you want to run things a bit more efficiently, you'll start to pay attention to how many boilers you build.
- Second, it makes you think about your flexibility needs and rewards steady consumption over spiky consumption. Say you have a steady base consumption of 8000 kW, with 17 engines, you'll have each of them running at 471kW and eat the corresponding amount of fuel. Now, because your factory isn't running perfectly seamlessly (some inserters are stopping then running all at once, you have laser turrets...), imagine that your consumption is usually at 8000 kW, but spikes occasionnally at 12000kW. To ensure security of supply, you'd need 24 boilers (24*510 = 12240), but those boilers will always run at least at 90% of their capacity, which is equal to about 11000kW. In other words, outside of the consumption spikes, you'll burn nearly 40% (11000/8000) more fuel than necessary. The higher your spikes are, the more boilers you'll need, the more fuel you'll waste outside of spikes. A smooth, regularly working factory will be easier to supply in power than a factory with lots of irregularities, congestion, manual interventions to pick up/drop items, etc. Again, it's not something that will overwhelm the new player (at worst it means wasting fuel), but will make building a clockwork factory more rewarding.
- Also, as a side effect, it would make laser turrets less of an obvious choice to replace gun turrets since they have a high "hidden cost" due to their spiky consumption.

Now, once you have this flexibility property, you can implement a range of new ways to generate and manage power each offering interesting variations :
- Basic steam engine, 510kW, 10% flexibility -> good for early game, where you have a low consumption and don't really care about wasting fuel in a few steam engines.
- Large steam engine, 2500kW, 10% flexibility -> replaces 5 basic steam engines on the paper, so you save a bit on room, but be careful, it's still only 10% flexible, but with 5 times the capacity, so if it's underused, you'll waste a lot more fuel.
- Oil/gas turbine, 510kW, 50% flexibility -> In addition to using a different type of fuel (heavy oil, light oil or petroleum gas), this engine offers more flexibility and is thus a good complement to the basic engine.
- Nuclear plant, 50 MW, 0% flexibility -> Behemoth of production, but no flexibility, so it's only something you want to use if you have a really big factory otherwise you'll waste a lot of energy.
- Solar panels/wind turbines, ???kW, 0% flexibility -> no fuel consumption, so flexibility is mostly irrelevant. However, unlike thermal plants (in which it's easy to disconnect a turbine or reduce the actual power generation while the steam is still there), with renewables you have to consume all the power generated - if consumption is not sufficient to eat up all the renewable production, those renewables will slowly get damaged. Ultimately, this means that renewables will be excellent to supply most of the "baseline" consumption of the plant, but covering a spiky consumption with excess renewable capacity won't be a good idea; you can't just cover huge areas with solar panels to solve all your power problems.
- Accumulators, 100% flexibility -> an easy way to solve flexibility issues in complement to designing a healthy production mix and a steady consumption, but they don't come cheap (or at least, shouldn't). They could possibly also have an efficiency cost (say, to store 1MJ in accumulators, you'll need 1,1MJ, and when discharging, you'll inject only 0,9MJ on the grid - nearly 20% of the energy is wasted in the storage process) to put a price on their use.

[bobucles]

A relatively simple suggestion to make power management a little bit deeper.

That's not simple at all! Simple is just giving steam plants a few hundred kJ of accumulator capacity. Like a second's worth. Consider it some kind of spare inertia in the motor.

Accumulators explicitly exist to handle frequent, medium term spikes in demand.

[ssilk]

Quite interesting idea. It is more or less like having a power drain (most devices in Factorio have a standby power drain).

I think for an updated version (5 times the power or so) of the steam engine it could make sense: It cannot stop imediatelly, it takes a minute or so to heat up and also to cool down, so it is quite inefficient, if you let it just run on demand; like in real world we have smaller power supply, which can react very fast on changing demand and big power plants, that are only efficient, if you manage them to run around the clock with the same power output.

[Rockstar04]

Quite interesting idea. It is more or less like having a power drain (most devices in Factorio have a standby power drain).

I think for an updated version (5 times the power or so) of the steam engine it could make sense: It cannot stop imediatelly, it takes a minute or so to heat up and also to cool down, so it is quite inefficient, if you let it just run on demand; like in real world we have smaller power supply, which can react very fast on changing demand and big power plants, that are only efficient, if you manage them to run around the clock with the same power output.

I've always wished that even normal steam engine had a ramp up period.

[ssilk]

Well, they have. More or less it's the "weight of the water". It takes some milliseconds until the water flows if you go to the limits of what a pipe can handle. You can see this effect barely, only in extreme situations. It is much lower, if you put some storage tank at the end of the line.

Sorry. And it's also not what's wanted. But I wanted to mention it.

But I've a bit different opinion to this. I don't think the current steam engine should take a ramp up period, cause the current game as it is is complicated enough for beginners. And it adds at this stage of the game just some hassle without making more fun. My opinion.

[Smarty]

But I've a bit different opinion to this. I don't think the current steam engine should take a ramp up period, cause the current game as it is is complicated enough for beginners. And it adds at this stage of the game just some hassle without making more fun. My opinion.

keep the basic steam engine the same but have another steam engine which you have to unlock through research, that has a ramp up time but produces more energy. The basic steam engine produces 510kj and the upgraded steam engine produces 1mj but has a ramp up time

[jacob021302]

I like this idea.

[ssilk]

I like it too, because see above:

I think for an updated version (5 times the power or so) of the steam engine it could make sense: It cannot stop imediatelly, it takes a minute or so to heat up and also to cool down, so it is quite inefficient, if you let it just run on demand; like in real world we have smaller power supply, which can react very fast on changing demand and big power plants, that are only efficient, if you manage them to run around the clock with the same power output.

... Ok, I didn't just double the output, I made it 5-10 times larger. In that case the ramp-up time also increases (of course). In the end it's a matter of balancing. But that idea as whole makes sense, cause it is a good reason to use more circuits and power switching, but doesn't force the player to do anything.

[Smarty]

... Ok, I didn't just double the output, I made it 5-10 times larger. In that case the ramp-up time also increases (of course). In the end it's a matter of balancing. But that idea as whole makes sense, cause it is a good reason to use more circuits and power switching, but doesn't force the player to do anything.[/quote]

[GoldenPorkchop80]

(you'd need the extra rare 235 uranium isotope to make nukes, making them hard to get and justify the ingame power they have)

uh, pretty sure nukes are made out of Plutonium-239, not Uranium-235...

[GoldenPorkchop80]

Don't forget about alien power source technology! Alien bases should be able to expand into "factories" like the players.

Then maybe the player could steal the alien technology when they drop their alien science packs.

I second this motion.

I third this motion.

[kinnom]

(you'd need the extra rare 235 uranium isotope to make nukes, making them hard to get and justify the ingame power they have)

uh, pretty sure nukes are made out of Plutonium-239, not Uranium-235...

they're made out of both

[joe_da_cro]

based on the real world and seemingly how it works in this game. Fueled Energy generation comes from boiling water then the steam turning the steam engines. This of course discounts solar energy.

When you have a system like Solar in the game, coupled with accumulators there is really less importance on the Steam engine. basically why invest in the infrastructure on uranium ore (for a new Power type) when you can build a solar array with accumulators which do the same job albeit with a larger amount of space used. Although if like coal there is more than one purpose for the uranium like suggested nuclear weaponry would make implementing it just for the added industry for the weapons alone.

what i would like to see as suggested where Fueled energy generation is slow to react to changing power demands. I think the best way to handle this would be to have the water boilers ( coal, wood, solid fuel, {new fuel source}) take longer to heat up water that passes through it. then use internal logic to determine the power state of the generators when demands drops slowing it down until it reaches the current state (this would determine reheat times of the water). This makes accumulators have value in a fueled power source factory. Although I will suggest that fueled power should have a end game purpose. one could be a new steam engine (or complete power plant) which take water and generates alot of power with a smaller footprint.

Ultimately i would love to see pollution tied to the fuel used. Meaning you can tie any new fuel source to the energy sector by just using boilers. As in the real world coal, oil and nuclear power plants are just one big water boiler. Also if the fuel types can have attributes attached to them you can also edit thinks like production speed on furnaces for example.

[Align]

I feel like what's needed most is another source of infinite energy, but one that pollutes, so you're choosing between green power or cheap power.

There's oil, but you need that for so much other stuff, and it still uses boilers+steam engines, which are better than solar panels but still not very compact.

Maybe geothermal?

[joe_da_cro]

I feel like what's needed most is another source of infinite energy, but one that pollutes, so you're choosing between green power or cheap power.

There's oil, but you need that for so much other stuff, and it still uses boilers+steam engines, which are better than solar panels but still not very compact.

Maybe geothermal?

geothermal is a clean energy source also. although your initial comment got me thinking about what you said and in combination to what others have said. if a new boiler type was created with a new ore type of uranium. it would obviously create new weapons and industry but also a new power source coupled with the new nuclear boiler. where the pollution comes from is not the boilers but the dumping ground for the waste from the nuclear industry.

[stowed4sea]

based on the real world and seemingly how it works in this game. Fueled Energy generation comes from boiling water then the steam turning the steam engines. This of course discounts solar energy.

When you have a system like Solar in the game, coupled with accumulators there is really less importance on the Steam engine. basically why invest in the infrastructure on uranium ore (for a new Power type) when you can build a solar array with accumulators which do the same job albeit with a larger amount of space used. Although if like coal there is more than one purpose for the uranium like suggested nuclear weaponry would make implementing it just for the added industry for the weapons alone.

Space is the largest consideration. Back when I was a Field Engineer for GE, I worked on one of the largest solar farms in the world. Over 500 MW of generation takes up a ridiculous amount of space. Around 8 square miles if I remember correctly. I haven't taken the time to do the math if it is modeled correctly in the game or not, but it seems right.

Imagine when building a new base, far away from your home base power grid, to be able to take a few pieces of uranium to fuel a reactor that could output 100 MW of clean energy. That is the impact that a nuclear reactor could have. Granted this wouldn't matter if playing in peaceful mode, but when trying to keep those external bases small and defensible, having a near endless source of energy could be wonderful.

I'm only about 40 hours new to factorio, and haven't played with the mods to see how accurate Nuclear energy is in those, but as a prior nuclear operator in our Navy on a submarine, I would love to see nuclear make the vanilla game. We had a 165 MW reactor and that size would be just about perfect for most bases.

Those reactors were built to last 15 years without needing to refuel. I'm not sure if they would want that exact same realism in the game. Either way, I'd love to see it as a clean energy source with no pollution, as it is in real life. Sure, a nuclear reactor does have some radioactive waste involved with its routine operation, but instead of just keeping it there at the site, you could output it in cubes or something that the train could take back to your main base for processing and burial in a concrete bunker that gives off maybe small level of pollution for the bugs to hone in on.

A nuclear reactor is a pain to operate in real life, with many support systems that could be added for realism. Or they could make the actual building of the reactor similar to the refining process instead of being just a block building. The game already has piping and pumps and tanks. A nuclear reactor is just a hot rock that makes steam inside an enclosed loop with a heat exchanger to transfer heat to the secondary side without the water mixing. From there, that hot water just makes turbine generators go spinny spinny. I guess the game could use the same steam engines it already uses, but I'd love to see some more modern, powerful turbine generators.

That could be a lot for them to do though, and I know that there are already some good mods that make nuclear power.

I currently operate part of the power grid in real life, and the transmission lines bother me. In real life, you must pay careful attention to loading so that you don't exceed capacity of the line. I wonder how difficult it would be for them to implement something like that in game. I'm not talking about monitoring frequency, amperage, real and reactive power, but just something simple like loading. The game already knows the power loading for each machine that uses power. Just put some logic in there to trace it all back to the source by using some simple math.

Actually, it isn't simple at all when you get into multiple lines connected together in a grid. Determining how much power flows on each line could cause major programming headaches, and I wouldn't want that. Anyway, those are my thoughts. I love the game and will be happy with any improvements.

[Align]

While a pollution-free nuclear reactor makes sense from a realism perspective, I don't think it fits that late-game energy generation is unavoidably green. Like, it should be an option, but not the best option unless you're specifically going for low pollution, and currently solar is the best for everything because it's infinite and scales up easily (whereas steam not only requires more logistics but is further restricted by needing water and therefore messy piping). The one-time cost in resources for building and clearing out nests is negligible compared to the advantages.

Which is why I want an infinite but polluting source of energy. In the main FFF thread, someone mentioned the thermal boreholes from Alpha Centauri, and I love that idea. Basically a controlled volcano, right? With all these horrible gases to upset the biters.

[MalcolmCooks]

Space is the largest consideration. Back when I was a Field Engineer for GE, I worked on one of the largest solar farms in the world. Over 500 MW of generation takes up a ridiculous amount of space. Around 8 square miles if I remember correctly. I haven't taken the time to do the math if it is modeled correctly in the game or not, but it seems right.

If one tile is assumed to be 1 square meter (this is how speed of vehicles is calculated anyway), then solar panels in game have a max output of 6.67 kW/m^2. The sunshine that hits earth on a sunny day is between 1 and 1.2 kW/m^2, so if the Factorio planet is earthlike solar panels are over 600% efficient I believe the planet has a brighter sunshine compared to earth though, but exactly how bright I can't say. I think 6 times brighter would probably be deadly to humans, though.