Interesting, but I wonder will this project just end up gobbling up federal tax money like Solendra (sp?).

In addition to the batteries, you have to throw in the cost of an inverter or dedicated DC current appliances.

There is still a valid reason Nicoli Tesla's design beat out Edison.
It's kind of ironic a battery company named their products after the father of alternating current.

 

If some one could only invent a battery to store AC, that would be an interesting thing

 

I gotta say, I like this idea.
Off grid living.
I wonder if it will be a solar/ battery setup?
the article it pretty vague.

 

My Jr. High science teacher told us to invent an AC battery if we wanted to get rich. that was 30 years ago.

 

Lol mine said the same same thing but it was only 20 years ago :

 

So now we will create more hazardous waste with batteries on a large scale to power houses and cars. While still burning fossil fuels to charge batteries. Sounds like we are still at square one but the few all ready invested will come out like bandits, filthy rich.

 

One of the biggest hurdles of renewable energy like solar and wind is that they're inconsistent. An economic way to store energy produced on excessively productive days, it would make those means of energy production more viable in the market.

With fuel-based power generation you can increase or decrease production at will. Can't just turn the sun or wind on and off when you need it.

Energy storage would also allow us to build more efficient plants that run more consistently instead of using variable output plants that aren't as efficient.

 

You could make some money with a battery like this if your state permits it. In Texas the wholesale cost of electricity ranges from 2¢/kwh to a PUC cap of $9.00/kwh. The Tesla type S batteries holds 85 kwh of electricity. When the grid is stressing and the cost hits the price cap, as it did for 20 hours in 2011, you could make $15,000 in a year with your car batteries - and be helping your neighbors at the same time.

All you would need is an electricity rate that lets you use your smart meter to track hourly wholesale prices, a net-metering statute that lets you run your meter backwards and legislators that don't take money from the power companies.

Tom

 

Imagine a way to store the energy from lightning.

 

There is. Nature did it for us. We generally call it thunder. Now it's only a partial conversion and relatively short lived. Millions of times longer than the lifetime of a muon. But still too short for us to harness.

On the other hand think about the constant sustained and sustainable power in the ocean currents and tides. Don't help if you live inland. But I can think of a whole lot more ways to harness that power than lightning.

 

This is not new technology, or new battery capacity. In fact, those with substantial funds can and do, easily live off grid.

I produce my own power, from time to time. I built my own diesel generator that operates on waste fuel.

And my own solar panels too.

But, I cant afford a huge battery bank

 

My son is a solar contractor and electrician who has installed many residential and commercial solar systems in Hi (electric is .35 per kwh there) and the states. He says that off grid technology is certainly doable but not really ready for prime time due to issues with batteries and storage as well as the demand on the system from appliances, etc. There are many things waiting in the wings and this might be one of them. Cost as usual, is the biggest obstacle to overcome. The biggest problem for his business is that solar has become so popular in Hi that the utility industry has pressured politicians to put a halt to it for now. It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall to see the backroom political pressure on politicians to keep anything that is detrimental to the electrical utility industry/grid off the market.

 

At least with SpaceX, he only got half what Boeing got and he already has his rocket and capsule. He is more efficient with his money than Boeing. He has also got contracts on about half the satellite launches.

 

Potentially it should reduce costs..but the capital expense might not be worth it..need more info..

------



This new Tesla battery will power your home, and maybe the electric grid too
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...12/this-new-tesla-battery-will-power-your-home-and-maybe-the-electric-grid-too/

Well, that wapo 'article' was pretty much worthless. "New" battery? They didn't say squat about what was new about it, the technology involved or anything else of use to the reader.

Blah, blah, blah...

Just a bigger pile of these:

Like what's in their cars.

 

word.... its just a backup, the only time it will ever save money is during peak grid times as a supplement, might be an okay backup for power outages, but its definitely not stand alone unless you have some kind of power generation capability at home.

 

Why all the negative ?
Give it a chance .
You should realize that we ( the consumer) are the R&D department funding end of things, including lap tops and all the other gadgets we invest in.
I buy electronics and tools that may not be fully up to par yet, but with input from users, the manufacturer has a base to work with to make improvements.
This is how americans had made better stuff then the rest of the world.
Or use to.

 

This (arleigh) is exactly correct. Power generation and utilization is at the top of the list of challenges to humanity. Being able to efficiently buffer and store energy when the rates are low and deliver it back when the rates or high (or conversely to use solar panels when they are generating high output in the daytime and run it back at night) is just a better and more efficient way to make use of electrical power.
Lots of people on this site talk about going 'off grid' and I never hear about recycling issues. But when a true genius (PayPal, Tesla, SpaceX) has a new solution everyone goes negative and implies that he's wasting government money. But few ever bring up the challenge or recycling the lead acid golf cart batteries that is recommended for off grid use. What a sliding scale of judgement.
The new batteries are to be produced at the giant plant being built out in the desert, to replace the small cells originally used in the cars. Tesla was smart enough to scale the plant to create batteries not only for cars but for other solutions as well. In doing so solving other problems and lowering the cost per KWh.
I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla develops a recycling plant to remove spent batteries from their cars and pick out the precious (and dangerous) metals from them before recycling them in to new ones. The plant is designed to work from raw materials in to high grade completed product.
B

 

As for deep cycle batteries I plan to rebuild and build them for my self as a necessity, not an option.
Others can struggle with waiting on others to manufacture things , I'Just as soon know what's in my equipment.
Does not bother me to learn how things work, or learn how to make them work better.
Few things I own remain as they were originally manufactured.
As for some new battery , I'l give it time, and learn how to make it my self.
Didn't you take things apart as a kid, just to see what made it tick ?

 

I'm curious if this is based on an actual Tesla (the man himself) design or someone riding on his coat tails.

Anyway it goes, it would be a boon to many of us. If whoever controls the grid let it be produced of course.

 

Interestingly, the Tesla Model S gets about 265 miles range from an 85KWH battery. Improvements in battery energy density could provide a massive improvement in range, or reduction in battery weight.

However, my Cessna Cardinal has a 200HP lycoming engine. It takes 20 minutes to climb to altitude, at full power. A Tesla's 1223 pound battery contains just barely enough energy to get my airplane to altitude.

The 6 hours flight time my 50 gallon fuel tanks hold would require 12 additional Tesla batteries! For a grand total of 15,900 pounds worth, or 13 Tesla batteries. See the problem?

50 gal avgas = 300 pounds
Tesla battery equiv = nearly 16,000 pounds.

And, that's not comparing energy density, just real world HP output.

 

Elon Musk is the man!

 

So...$30-$40 grand for a battery, or spend half that on a generator and a big honking propane tank full of fuel.

Sorry. The cost is still way too high.

 

What I like about Musk is that he's not stuck on one note, such as making the lead acid battery better. He's exploring Lithium Ion technology. He's working with supercapacitors. He's probably working on things we have no idea of. Maybe they're not all "mainstream". Maybe some of them will fail. And then again, maybe something really good will work. I admire the man for continuing to try to make the world a better place.

(I also lust after that Model S from time to time, but it's too much $$ for me to afford.)

 

What I like about Musk is that he's not stuck on one note, such as making the lead acid battery better. He's exploring Lithium Ion technology. He's working with supercapacitors. He's probably working on things we have no idea of. Maybe they're not all "mainstream". Maybe some of them will fail. And then again, maybe something really good will work. I admire the man for continuing to try to make the world a better place.

(I also lust after that Model S from time to time, but it's too much $$ for me to afford.)

Musk is a business man. Business men are in business to make money. Musk is investing $ millions into his giga-factory to produce Li Ion cells hoping to produce them MUCH cheaper than is now possible.

After he has his pile of them, he has to sell them. The Tesla Model S is a marvel, but there are not enough of them to soak up the production from the giga-factory.

So, why not build a "home battery" to create a new market for them?

I like the super capacitor angle because I don't think electrical 'chemical' energy storage is the answer. For the average home owner it is WAY too fussy, complicated, expensive, dangerous and the energy density is way too low in batteries.

Grid-tie systems make much more sense.

 

We had solar city put panels on our roof a year ago. Our monthly bill due Edison each month is about 1 dollar a month. Our kwh rate is fixed and is much lower than Edison. I asked about full on system that would work when Edison fails, six months ago it was six months to a year out for full battery back up, ie: no need for Edison.

Will have to check into it again.

Having power when the grid goes down was one of the main reasons we went solar, we are not there yet but will be as soon as possible.

In the mean time we're paying a lot less for power. Solar companies are popping up like crazy and solar IS the future. My guess is that Edison is making moves now to gobble up those companies. Lobbying politicians to slow down the solar companies thru regulations etc.

We asked about panels for the well, they couldn't do it because for some reason it's zoned/considered commercial. It's a private well on private property. That's one example of regulations inhibiting solar power.

 

For now, grid tie systems are the way to go. Who wants to service and maintain a battery bank regardless of which chemistry it is? If you do go batteries, "Edison" Ni Fe cells are the safest, longest lived, and easiest to deal with.

BTW, the power company does NOT buy back the power you generate at the same rates that you buy from them. You might pay 8 cents, they buy from you at 1 cent.

As far as "when" the electric company fails, my guess is it would be less hassle to have a propane or natural gas powered generator set for those occasions. Both gasoline and diesel degrade over time.

Of course if you REALLY do want to get completely off the grid, be prepared to deal with all the hassle of battery maintenance. It is not insignificant. Nor cheap.

 

Imagine if every home had solar panels on the roof. Although I don't like more govt, I think all new homes should include/require solar panels. The more the technology is used, the more efficient and cheaper it will be.

Wind power is NOT the answer, nor is that colossal failure near Las Vegas. Jeez, they have what they call "smokers" or something like that. Birds fly by and get instantly cooked by the heat of the reflectors.

The wind turbines all over California are not only an eye sore, they are noisy, they kill off a lot of avian species.

Was up at a friends house/ranch up in Tehachapi, big wind far up there, noisy as hell. I can only imagine how nice and peaceful is was before the turbines, now, it's a noisy nuisance ruining quality of life.

Had they installed solar panels like they are currently doing in Kern county, it wouldn't of ruined anything but possibly your view.

There are downsides to the panels as well but I think they are less destructive.

 

I too would like to see more panels on every house. As the cost decreases, we may see more and more home owners placing panels up on their roofs. I think we can get people to do it eventually.

I believe if someone places panels on their roof they can potentially also sell to the local power company, not sure if it is significant enough to place that into the calculation, but something to consider.

And of course I know some of you go all out and get batteries to store all that power from the sun, that is good for prepping. So yeah, solar is the way to go I think, surprised it is just slowly catching on.

 

I am a huge fan of rooftop and neighborhood grid tie solar. Period. It's payback time is reasonable, and there really is no downside. Especially if the utilities pay for the installation!

Today's natural gas powerplants can respond very rapidly to demand fluctuations. So, that problem has been minimized.

 

I still think folks are focusing solely on the profit, and actual use of the product and not the manufacturing side or disposal side . Some dont see anything wrong with panels mandated on every house in the US but dont think about how much pollution that would cause. We would be worse off than we are now, 10X.

 

That "How green are solar panels" video is very misleading. What is the truth? I don't know and I"m not gonna spend hours researching it, I don't care to be an expert on footprint of solar power.

I will say that China is the worst polluter in the world. Seeing a big toxic mess outside one of their factories is normal. Companies lease the land from the Chinese govt, the Chinese control regulations regarding toxic waste and can shut them down at any time.

I would like to see a comparison by an impartial third party that compares the footprint of all types of energy production.

Solar has a footprint at birth and at death. Will a bank of panels last 25 years? 50 years? 10 years?

 

New Tesla Battery

Saw this article the other day about the new Tesla Battery that is looking to work its way to homes. I've been having problems finding more info on it, but was wondering if it wouldn't be a better fit for most of us instead of a generator of some type?

 

Saw this article the other day about the new Tesla Battery that is looking to work its way to homes. I've been having problems finding more info on it, but was wondering if it wouldn't be a better fit for most of us instead of a generator of some type?

A generator is an energy source. A battery is an energy storage device.

It does not matter what chemistry or what technology they develop, a storage device is not a replacement for a source.

Now if an advancement in the battery allowed you to use a more efficient source, or a renewable source, then it might be worth something.

 

Does panel voltage vary with sunshine? If so, what happens to the electricity when the panels are only putting out 14 v each? Can it still fill up the batteries?

 

The output voltage of your solar panel does depend on the amount of light it absorbs. Whether a lower-voltage will charge a battery depends on how your panels are connected to the battery.

If you just plugged a solar panel into a battery, the solar panel would charge the battery any time the solar panel's voltage was higher than the battery's voltage. If the solar panel's voltage dropped below the battery's voltage, the battery would "backfeed" the solar panel, driving current into it and potentially damaging it.

Because of this kind of concern, most solar setups with batteries will have protection diodes between the solar panel and the battery to prevent the battery from discharging into the solar panel when the output is low. There is a very slight loss in solar panel output due to the addition of these diodes.

Additionally, in this simplistic setup (Solar panel->diodes->battery), you waste all of the output of the solar panel when it's output is low on overcast days (voltage too low to charge), and can run the risk of overcharging the battery and damaging on bright summer days (voltage too high). The solution to this problem is to use a fancy electronic charger that keeps the output voltage at an ideal level by stepping up or stepping down what comes in from the solar panels. You take another small efficiency hit, but gain the ability to safely and efficiently charge your battery in a much wider range of solar panel output conditions.

Your basic solar powered battery setup now looks like (panels->diodes/charger->battery)
You can tweak additional things to improve efficiency or performance, but you more or less need a charger of some sort to best utilize your panels.