RadoStefanov Posted May 3, 2015 Report Share Posted May 3, 2015 Why lithium batteries keep catching fire http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/01/economist-explains-19 US testing shows aircraft safety systems can't prevent lithium-ion battery fire http://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2015/05/01/us-testing-of-lithium-batteries-alarms-aviation-officials Batteries on planes pose 'increased fire risk' http://www.bbc.com/news/business-25733346 I was thinking about that. PowerWall are for indoors or outdoors installations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solid Goldberger Posted May 4, 2015 Report Share Posted May 4, 2015 First person to invent the electric commercial aircraft wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Duffy Posted May 4, 2015 Report Share Posted May 4, 2015 Not sure if this Powerwall is a step in the right direction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_encumbrance_of_large_automotive_NiMH_batteries#Timeline_of_legal_status_of_the_Ovonics_battery_technology Finally the mist is clearing over large NiMH battery tech, this will be much cheaper than LiIon. The Powerwall is just charger + battery, the DC->AC converter is not included. That converter (not a pure "inverter", because the stated DC voltage goes up to 350V!) will be more expensive than current tech because of that high DC voltage. If you have the space to keep them indoors, the equivalent amount of lead wet cell batteries plus charger is about half the cost of the powerwall. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium#Production Lithium prices do not look to go down in the next few decades, they look to go up... As other people have commented on here before, if you include the environmental impact of manufacturing solar cells, they are a net negative. That has to be doubly so for Lithium using products. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henchman Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 As other people have commented on here before, if you include the environmental impact of manufacturing solar cells, they are a net negative. I love it when people make that statement. How does it compare to a single oil spill on the envorenment? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henchman Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Good article about solar myths. http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/01/24/myths-and-facts-about-solar-energy/192364 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Wexler Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 +1 for Henchman. The sorts of obstacles that people put up, based on economic feasability or environmental "costs" or the loss of jobs, whatever, seem never to be applied to the traditional and existing methods of electricity generation. If you even casually analyze the cost of oil, coal or nuclear to oiur environment, to our economy, to the health of every human being on the planet and the planet itself, the numbers are not pretty and tell a very dire story. Regarding radiation and everything else relating to nuclear power, I have often said something I heard a long time ago: why are we using the most complex, dangerous and toxic method to generate electricity --- if we as intelligent, civilized and developed human beings can't find a better way to bering water to a boil then we deserve to have a slow and tedious path to extinction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Storing energy locally is very energy efficient. Regardless of the downsides/limitation of lithium and solar what Tesla is achieving with there PowerWall home battery is advertising the idea of home power storage and bringing it mainstream. "Lets hope state governments don't make it illegal" But the most important Tesla achievement is releasing all their patents for their cars. Everybody in the world is free to use their technology. I only hope they do the same for the PowerWall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnpaul215 Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 But the most important Tesla achievement is releasing all their patents for their cars. Everybody in the world is free to use their technology. I only hope they do the same for the PowerWall. He makes mention of that in the presentation. He talks about how many Gigafactories there would need to be around the world, not just run by Tesla, but their company open policy continues. It's about 16:25 in the presentation linked above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 He makes mention of that in the presentation. He talks about how many Gigafactories there would need to be around the world, not just run by Tesla, but their company open policy continues. It's about 16:25 in the presentation linked above. Must have missed that. Bravo Tesla. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrd456 Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 I am interested in seeing how much our next bill will be. We moved end of last year, and have only had to run the aircon a lot the last two months. The house we were in before was small yet we had 3 bills last year that were $900 each. Once we get out solar installed, it will be interesting to see how much much we will still be paying yearly. If it's more than $400, then it would be worth it in the Longrun. Especially since they are projecting a rate hike of 25% in the next couple Of years. As of now, it looks like our daily average use is about 4kwh a day. So a 10 kWh battery would more than suffice, and we would never ever ever pay for electricity again. Only 4 kwh a day ?so it would cost you under $2 per day ? J.D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Duffy Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 I love it when people make that statement. How does it compare to a single oil spill on the envorenment? I'm not pro oil. Power from oil is an anomaly that we are lucky to be abusing. Personally I think we should be 100% nuclear + solar/wind power, or some future technology that beams down power from a near-space solar collector like in SimCity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Constantin Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 . Personally I think we should be 100% nuclear + solar/wind powerReally? Earlier you posted the negative net effect of solar energy. All things taken into consideration, what do you think is the net effect of nuclear energy? Just a European perspective, here in Germany, as you may know, nuclear power is being phased out (by law) in the next fee years. The cost alone of dismantling one single power plant is going to be several billion €. All the power companies have formed a fund woth 230 billion € in it, just for dismantling. Experts say that's not enough. Now Germany is a small country and we only ever had like 20% of energy provided by nuclear power. Imagine the cost (for one day in the furure) for the US. In addition, what you have dismantled is in great parts radio-active and this material needs to be stored safely somewhere, let alone the used up rods and so on. All of this needs to be paid for by someone, plus many many more costs of course... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnpaul215 Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Solar really is barely used source here in the USA: There are currently 104 operating nuclear reactors at 64 plants across the country. Half are over 30 years old. Nuclear power provides the country with about 18% of its electricity. Coal is the nation's largest source for electricity, providing 43% of our energy, while natural gas makes up another 25%, according to the Energy Information Agency. Renewables make up the remaining 14%, with hydroelectric dams accounting for more than half of that. Wind accounts for about 3% and biomass (think paper mills or agricultural plants) another 2%. Solar and geothermal make up under 1% of American electricity production, according to EIA. http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/09/news/economy/nuclear_reactors/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Wexler Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Constatin has said: "In addition, what you have dismantled is in great parts radio-active and this material needs to be stored safely somewhere, let alone the used up rods and so on. All of this needs to be paid for by someone, plus many many more costs of course..." This is a cost that is seldom talked about, the de-commisioning of nuclear power plants, and it seems it is only talked about when the utility companies, heavily subsidized from day one, are trying to get somebody to pay up. Regarding the health and safety issues, all the parts, all the materials, even the very ground the plant sat on, the half-life of radioactive materials means it has be guarded and protected for more years than any and all human societies have existed so far. How can we assume that some industrialized and technologically and politically stable society will survive long enough to be the custodian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trat Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 I am interested in seeing how much our next bill will be. We moved end of last year, and have only had to run the aircon a lot the last two months. The house we were in before was small yet we had 3 bills last year that were $900 each. Once we get out solar installed, it will be interesting to see how much much we will still be paying yearly. If it's more than $400, then it would be worth it in the Longrun. Especially since they are projecting a rate hike of 25% in the next couple Of years. As of now, it looks like our daily average use is about 4kwh a day. So a 10 kWh battery would more than suffice, and we would never ever ever pay for electricity again. So, I'm the sound guy that decided he didn't want to travel his whole career and started branching off between shows. Ive been "freelancing" for a solar company here in FL. Of course I'm looking for reviews on the new L series and get sucked into a solar/battery discussion. First, Congrats on a 4kWh (part of me thinks you meant to type 40kWh?) a day. National average is about 30KWh. Assuming 40 kWh, you'd need an 8kWh array(about 28 panels). This is based on an industry standard "5 hour solar day". 8kW/hour x 5 hours = 40kW. Ready for the sticker Shock... about $40k.... but wait theres more. Government tax credit knocks 30% off that. So now your looking at $28k. Financed at 2.99% over 144 months is $229.60 per month. So, I'd argue, IF your bill is more than $229.60, not $400, you're already at a net neutral. Net Metering is your most cost effective solution to not paying an electrical bill. What I would like to see is 3 or 4 of these tesla batteries "topped off" by my array so that when the power DOES go out I have a reliable backup. Thus conserving the amount of times your wall battery cycles and prolonging the life of your battery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Spaeth Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Really? Earlier you posted the negative net effect of solar energy. All things taken into consideration, what do you think is the net effect of nuclear energy? Just a European perspective, here in Germany, as you may know, nuclear power is being phased out (by law) in the next fee years. The cost alone of dismantling one single power plant is going to be several billion €. All the power companies have formed a fund woth 230 billion € in it, just for dismantling. Experts say that's not enough. Now Germany is a small country and we only ever had like 20% of energy provided by nuclear power. Imagine the cost (for one day in the furure) for the US. In addition, what you have dismantled is in great parts radio-active and this material needs to be stored safely somewhere, let alone the used up rods and so on. All of this needs to be paid for by someone, plus many many more costs of course... And yet they're still building new nuclear power plants all over the world, at this very moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Duffy Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Newer Nuclear power plant designs are more efficient and safer than the ones that are being decomissioned. All the known issues have solutions. It's certainly the most unpopular source of power because of accidents, doesn't mean it should be ruled out 100%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Ya place them on the california coast and see if they will withstand a serious earthquake. As somebody that had radiation rain on him from Chernobil and saw a lot of people get sick and births of deformed children I am a little skeptical about nuclear power. No offence but I lived trough it and am not impressed. This is what one accident did in the first 14 days http://www.ratical.org/radiation/Chernobyl/IRSN14dayPlume.html Newer Nuclear power plant designs are more efficient and safer than the ones that are being decomissioned. All the known issues have solutions. It's certainly the most unpopular source of power because of accidents, doesn't mean it should be ruled out 100%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Wexler Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Newer Nuclear power plant designs are more efficient and safer than the ones that are being decomissioned. All the known issues have solutions. It's certainly the most unpopular source of power because of accidents, doesn't mean it should be ruled out 100%. Sorry, Tom, I couldn't disagree with you more. "All known issues have solutions" is just not true (unless you mean the major issues are ones that we don't "know" yet). There isn't one aspect of generating electricity by nuclear means that makes it even a last place choice for the technology to be used going forward. We'll agree to disagree --- I'm not going to get into a whole discussion of nuclear power plants --- it is safe to say that I AM definitely anti-nuclear through and through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Constantin Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 And yet they're still building new nuclear power plants all over the world, at this very moment. Absolutely. Crazy isn't it? Governments will still fall for the lure of seemingly cheap power and, of course, nuclear power helps meet co2 reduction goals so it seems like a win-win situation. One more aspect, by the way, which highlights the craziness of it all and shows the many subsidies which the electric companies get, even though they often claim total financial independence: Force the owners of nuclear power plants to take out liability insurance. Just like every other conpany can be held liable for tge products they make and the plants they own. It's not possible. There is no insurance company anywhere that would be crazy enough to provide liability insurance to nuclear plant owners. It would be far too expensive. So, as we could witness in Japan, if something does go wrong, the government will eventually foot the bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Duffy Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Net Metering is your most cost effective solution to not paying an electrical bill. What I would like to see is 3 or 4 of these tesla batteries "topped off" by my array so that when the power DOES go out I have a reliable backup. Thus conserving the amount of times your wall battery cycles and prolonging the life of your battery. Setting up a PV system with batteries to run as a true "backup" is more complicated. Most grid-tied systems are designed (and legally required) to turn off if the grid voltage goes down (i.e. a utility power outage). They need that so your PV system doesn't feed the grid while workers are touching what they think are unpowered lines. To run the house from the PV + battery even when the power company is down, you need a micro-grid system, which involves a lot more equipment: http://ww3.wholesalesolar.com/newsletter/MAGNUM-AC-COUPLED-LINE-DIAGRAM_large.jpg?_ga=1.21137405.754137488.1430500989 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trat Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Setting up a PV system with batteries to run as a true "backup" is more complicated. Most grid-tied systems are designed (and legally required) to turn off if the grid voltage goes down (i.e. a utility power outage). They need that so your PV system doesn't feed the grid while workers are touching what they think are unpowered lines. To run the house from the PV + battery even when the power company is down, you need a micro-grid system, which involves a lot more equipment: http://ww3.wholesalesolar.com/newsletter/MAGNUM-AC-COUPLED-LINE-DIAGRAM_large.jpg?_ga=1.21137405.754137488.1430500989 Correct. And if I'm not mistaken, that diagram is a centrally inverted system, whereas most net metered systems today are being installed with micro inverters. There is no system in place like the one I described, but that's the hope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.279748a58a2b862b7aa5f3b84126e232.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.