Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 19:11:46 -0800, John Larkin wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/
The article doesn't offer any clues as to the technology offered. My
wild guess(tm) is that it's something like this water based organic
battery:
https://news.usc.edu/64612/usc-scientists-plug-in-to-a-new-battery-thats-cheap-clean-rechargeable-and-organic/
On 2/13/2015 12:36 AM, dagmargoo...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, February 12, 2015 at 10:51:36 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 19:11:46 -0800, John Larkin wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/
The article doesn't offer any clues as to the technology offered. My
wild guess(tm) is that it's something like this water based organic
battery:
https://news.usc.edu/64612/usc-scientists-plug-in-to-a-new-battery-thats-cheap-clean-rechargeable-and-organic/
Musk is busily making the biggest LiIon factory on the planet, if that's any clue.
When I read this I thought about the factor of scale a bit and it
occurred to me that while other life in the universe may well be very
different from our own because of any number of small differences in
their environment. But it is very likely they have the same LiIon
batteries because chemistry and physics are universal constants.
So Musk's factory is likely *not* the largest LiIon battery factory in
the universe.
Reminds me of a joke... a picture of a city block with a number of pizza
shops... 1st one has a sign in the window that says, "Best Pizza in the
city"... 2nd one has a large sign in the window that says, "Best Pizza
in the State!"... 3rd one has a large sign on top of the building that
says, "Best Pizza in the WORLD!!!"... last one has a tiny sign in the
window that says, "best pizza on the block"...
In article <ck5b0cFru6hU1@mid.individual.net>,
Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:
On 13/02/2015 2:11 PM, John Larkin wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/
" that could compete with the National Grid as a power source,"
Someone doesn't understand what "storage" means.
Sylvia.
Elon Musk has plans to build both battery and solar cell
"gigafactories." It's only natural to combine the two into a product
for disconnecting from the grid
On 13/02/2015 2:11 PM, John Larkin wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/
" that could compete with the National Grid as a power source,"
Someone doesn't understand what "storage" means.
Sylvia.
On Thursday, February 12, 2015 at 10:51:36 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 19:11:46 -0800, John Larkin wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/
The article doesn't offer any clues as to the technology offered. My
wild guess(tm) is that it's something like this water based organic
battery:
https://news.usc.edu/64612/usc-scientists-plug-in-to-a-new-battery-thats-cheap-clean-rechargeable-and-organic/
Musk is busily making the biggest LiIon factory on the planet, if that's any clue.
In article <ck5b0cFru6hU1@mid.individual.net>,
Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:
On 13/02/2015 2:11 PM, John Larkin wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/
" that could compete with the National Grid as a power source,"
Someone doesn't understand what "storage" means.
Sylvia.
Elon Musk has plans to build both battery and solar cell
"gigafactories." It's only natural to combine the two into a product
for disconnecting from the grid, while also preventing an electric grid
meltdown if everybody drove electric cars. Combined markets of
ecological fanatics, gadget fanatics, and those without reliable power
probably adds up to a large enough early-adopter market to start the
business.
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 19:11:46 -0800, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/
The article doesn't offer any clues as to the technology offered. My
wild guess(tm) is that it's something like this water based organic
battery:
https://news.usc.edu/64612/usc-scientists-plug-in-to-a-new-battery-thats-cheap-clean-rechargeable-and-organic/
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 19:51:25 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 19:11:46 -0800, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/
The article doesn't offer any clues as to the technology offered. My
wild guess(tm) is that it's something like this water based organic
battery:
https://news.usc.edu/64612/usc-scientists-plug-in-to-a-new-battery-thats-cheap-clean-rechargeable-and-organic/
It's probably going to use Musk's lithium ion batteries.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/uciliawang/2013/11/05/tesla-considers-building-the-worlds-biggest-lithium-ion-battery-factory/
http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/innovation/elon-musk-wants-tesla-batteries-power-homes-n305071
I suspect that most of the Musk ventures will eventually crash. The
Tesla may well go the way of the PT Cruiser. "Everybody who wanted one
had one."
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing laser drivers and controllers
jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/
On 13/02/2015 4:09 PM, Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
In article <ck5b0cFru6hU1@mid.individual.net>,
Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:
On 13/02/2015 2:11 PM, John Larkin wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/
" that could compete with the National Grid as a power source,"
Someone doesn't understand what "storage" means.
Sylvia.
Elon Musk has plans to build both battery and solar cell
"gigafactories." It's only natural to combine the two into a product
for disconnecting from the grid
People won't disconnect from the grid though, because there will always
be times when there's been insufficient sunshine. People will expect to
use the grid as backup.
The grid will have to charge a lot to allow people to use it as a
generator of last resort, and that will make the economics of solar plus
batteries even less attractive than they already are.
On 13/02/2015 6:17 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, 13 February 2015 17:42:59 UTC+11, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 13/02/2015 4:09 PM, Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
In article <ck5b0cFru6hU1@mid.individual.net>, Sylvia Else
sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:
On 13/02/2015 2:11 PM, John Larkin wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/
" that could compete with the National Grid as a power source,"
Someone doesn't understand what "storage" means.
Sylvia.
Elon Musk has plans to build both battery and solar cell
"gigafactories." It's only natural to combine the two into a
product for disconnecting from the grid
People won't disconnect from the grid though, because there will
always be times when there's been insufficient sunshine. People
will expect to use the grid as backup.
The grid will have to charge a lot to allow people to use it as a
generator of last resort, and that will make the economics of solar
plus batteries even less attractive than they already are.
On the other hand, sunlight is free, and we've still got at least one
more tenfold increase in solar-cell manufacturing volume in the
pipe-line, and the corresponding halving of the unit price per
kilowatt.
Engineers Australia hosted a puff from First Solar last night, and
while the speaker wasn't too explicit about how it worked, he seemed
totally convinced that his firm's 100 MegaWatt solar farms could
operate with the existing grid, and made a great fuss about being
able to smoothly ramp up the output into the grid, and ramp it down
equally smoothly.
Ramping up and down is helpful, but the real problem the grid has with
solar power is that the latter is not reliable, meaning that generating
capacity has to be available to cope with a solar power shortfall.
Batteries big enough to carry the grid through the night seems to be
some way off, but dealing with a small cloud passing across the array
of cells seems to be within reach, not that the speaker had a clue
about that (and he was asked about it in question time).
Getting through the night is better than nothing, but the grid also
needs to be able to cope with the shortfall that arises when the skies
are overcast during the day, meaning that the batteries didn't get
charged. In practice, there has to be backup for pretty much the entire
solar power generation capacity.
This capacity has a cost even when it's not being used, because of the
capital used to construct it.
The real cost of solar power is then the cost of the panels, plus the
cost of the batteries, plus the cost of the backup generators.
On Friday, 13 February 2015 17:42:59 UTC+11, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 13/02/2015 4:09 PM, Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
In article <ck5b0cFru6hU1@mid.individual.net>, Sylvia Else
sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:
On 13/02/2015 2:11 PM, John Larkin wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/
" that could compete with the National Grid as a power source,"
Someone doesn't understand what "storage" means.
Sylvia.
Elon Musk has plans to build both battery and solar cell
"gigafactories." It's only natural to combine the two into a
product for disconnecting from the grid
People won't disconnect from the grid though, because there will
always be times when there's been insufficient sunshine. People
will expect to use the grid as backup.
The grid will have to charge a lot to allow people to use it as a
generator of last resort, and that will make the economics of solar
plus batteries even less attractive than they already are.
On the other hand, sunlight is free, and we've still got at least one
more tenfold increase in solar-cell manufacturing volume in the
pipe-line, and the corresponding halving of the unit price per
kilowatt.
Engineers Australia hosted a puff from First Solar last night, and
while the speaker wasn't too explicit about how it worked, he seemed
totally convinced that his firm's 100 MegaWatt solar farms could
operate with the existing grid, and made a great fuss about being
able to smoothly ramp up the output into the grid, and ramp it down
equally smoothly.
Batteries big enough to carry the grid through the night seems to be
some way off, but dealing with a small cloud passing across the array
of cells seems to be within reach, not that the speaker had a clue
about that (and he was asked about it in question time).
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 00:47:39 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:
Overcast decreases solar power for non-concentrated panels, but doesn't eliminate it. You are always going to have excess capacity in any solar set-up.
I have heard this claim repeated a few hundred times, but never seen
any actual test reports supporting it.
I have done some tests with a small panel, measuring both current and
voltage simultaneously running into a variable resistor. Adjusting
that resistor for maximum voltage and current product to simulate an
MPPT. In my observation, the _power_ drop was quite significant when
some overcast occurred.
If you just measure the open circuit voltage or only short circuit
current, you might incorrectly draw the conclusion that overcast or a
small cloud doesn't do much harm. Only by running the panel into an
MPPT and measuring the current or voltage, you will get some usable
readings.
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 11:19:08 +0000, Martin Brown
|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
On 13/02/2015 09:41, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 00:47:39 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:
Overcast decreases solar power for non-concentrated panels, but doesn't eliminate it. You are always going to have excess capacity in any solar set-up.
I have heard this claim repeated a few hundred times, but never seen
any actual test reports supporting it.
Try looking in some of the text books that dealt with solar power in the
late 1970's. In the UK to a very good approximation the incident energy
from direct sunlight and indirect scattered light are about equal and
about 10% better for an optimally sloped roof.
Most places get more direct sunshine than the UK too.
Solar PV was largely ignored back then because the cells were both
expensive and inefficient. The context was for solar thermal.
Photographic exposure guide EV is another measure:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_value#Tabulated_exposure_values
Which gives a working range of 1:16 for the ratio of full sun on snow to
deep shade outdoors.
I have done some tests with a small panel, measuring both current and
voltage simultaneously running into a variable resistor. Adjusting
that resistor for maximum voltage and current product to simulate an
MPPT. In my observation, the _power_ drop was quite significant when
some overcast occurred.
It is something like an order of magnitude drop (or more) in incident
power from full direct sunshine to behind a thick cloud - depending on
how much thin cirrus there is about to scatter diffuse light around.
OTOH the cooler PV array performs a bit better.
If you just measure the open circuit voltage or only short circuit
current, you might incorrectly draw the conclusion that overcast or a
small cloud doesn't do much harm. Only by running the panel into an
MPPT and measuring the current or voltage, you will get some usable
readings.
Agreed that you have to measure incident and converter power.
Each photographic stop represents a power of 2, so 1 or 2 stops below
direct sun light is more or less useless.
It should also be noted that PV panels generate electricity only when
the photon has sufficient energy. Photons below this may increase the
bolometric (total energy) of the sky, but only photons above the
threshold will actually produce electricity.
On 13/02/2015 6:17 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, 13 February 2015 17:42:59 UTC+11, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 13/02/2015 4:09 PM, Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
In article <ck5b0cFru6hU1@mid.individual.net>, Sylvia Else
sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:
On 13/02/2015 2:11 PM, John Larkin wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/
" that could compete with the National Grid as a power source,"
Someone doesn't understand what "storage" means.
Sylvia.
Elon Musk has plans to build both battery and solar cell
"gigafactories." It's only natural to combine the two into a
product for disconnecting from the grid
People won't disconnect from the grid though, because there will
always be times when there's been insufficient sunshine. People
will expect to use the grid as backup.
The grid will have to charge a lot to allow people to use it as a
generator of last resort, and that will make the economics of solar
plus batteries even less attractive than they already are.
On the other hand, sunlight is free, and we've still got at least one
more tenfold increase in solar-cell manufacturing volume in the
pipe-line, and the corresponding halving of the unit price per
kilowatt.
Engineers Australia hosted a puff from First Solar last night, and
while the speaker wasn't too explicit about how it worked, he seemed
totally convinced that his firm's 100 MegaWatt solar farms could
operate with the existing grid, and made a great fuss about being
able to smoothly ramp up the output into the grid, and ramp it down
equally smoothly.
Ramping up and down is helpful, but the real problem the grid has with
solar power is that the latter is not reliable, meaning that generating
capacity has to be available to cope with a solar power shortfall.
Batteries big enough to carry the grid through the night seems to be
some way off, but dealing with a small cloud passing across the array
of cells seems to be within reach, not that the speaker had a clue
about that (and he was asked about it in question time).
Getting through the night is better than nothing, but the grid also
needs to be able to cope with the shortfall that arises when the skies
are overcast during the day, meaning that the batteries didn't get
charged. In practice, there has to be backup for pretty much the entire
solar power generation capacity.
This capacity has a cost even when it's not being used, because of the
capital used to construct it.
The real cost of solar power is then the cost of the panels, plus the
cost of the batteries, plus the cost of the backup generators.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/12/musk_to_unveil_home_storage_battery/