New Tesla Solar set up - 'Powerwall'

[Nungali]

I heard it was coming. Its the next new fantastic thing to save our problems !  
 
But why ?   I couldn't find out.   Last night, it was all over the news, and us Aussies are going to be able to trial it ! 
 
Lucky us  (its because we have so many solar panels )  and and ... blah  blah .
 
Why do I get the feeling when watching this ;  it hype, flattery, a good deal, amazing new technology,   .... but no real; specs or science or explanation why its so good.
 
Then I watched the release video .  Why does it seem like a cult gathering.  Why all the emotive giant screen nasty 'this is how we  generate pollution' hype ,  who cares about  the specs and why it is better than the current panel battery set ups ... actually ... did they say or explain how it was ?
 
But its a 'Tesla' !   That must mean something ?  And it looks soooo coool  and compact , if you had that on your wall , people would admire it !  Besides, they make great cars ! 
 
Even I thought I was being overly critical , so I checked some Tesla info and 'Powerwall' sites . They were making a big deal about how, the battery stores power from a panel in the day .... and you can use that at night when there is no sun .
 
W T F !   ?  
 
It also  stores power from the grid , in case the grid has a blackout . 
 
But still no reason why its better , overall, and that the specs and relative economics of it were ??? 
 
Until I found this ;
 
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-06/tesla-s-new-battery-doesn-t-work-that-well-with-solar

 

Eg.  " SolarCity is only offering the bigger Powerwall to customers buying new rooftop solar systems. Customers can prepay $5,000, everything included, to add a nine-year battery lease to their system or buy the Tesla battery outright outright for $7,140. The 10 kilowatt-hour backup battery is priced competitively, as far as batteries go, selling at half the price of some competing products.

 

" But if its sole purpose is to provide backup power to a home, the juice it offers is but a sip. The model puts out just 2 kilowatts of continuous power, which could be pretty much maxed out by a single vacuum cleaner, hair drier, microwave oven or a clothes iron. The battery isn’t powerful enough to operate a pair of space heaters; an entire home facing a winter power outage would need much more. In sunnier climes, meanwhile, it provides just enough energy to run one or two small window A/C units. 

 

" But SolarCity doesn’t offer a discount for multiple batteries. To provide the same 16 kilowatts of continuous power as this $3,700 Generac generator from Home Depot, a homeowner would need eight stacked Tesla batteries at a cost of $45,000 for a nine-year lease. "It's a luxury good—really cool to have—but I don't see an economic argument," said Brian Warshay, an energy-smart-technologies analyst with Bloomberg New Energy Finance.  

 

" ..... Tesla is probably making very little profit on the home batteries at this point and might even be selling them at a loss, according to research by BNEF. Both Tesla and SolarCity are just getting started, trying to get some traction before Tesla's massive $5 billion battery factory begins production next year. That's when the battery market really gets interesting. "

 
 
Also, they are doing the deal with 'Origin Energy' - people ... do not deal with them !  ( I am speaking from personal and observed experience here. ).
 
I will wait a while and keep using my own  system I put together thanks guys    
 
But thanks for thinking of Australia first !    

Edited December 10, 2015 by Nungali

[bluefire]

Well a backup gas fuel generator beating a smaller battery pack concerning power output shouldn't be a real suprise. Also during a power outage its probably not the best time to start vacuum cleaning.

On the other hand the eu plans to ban vacuum cleaner with more than 900Watt from 2017. With this it would be possible to vacuum clean together with your partner at the same time during a power outage. Now that's progress.

 

[Marblehead]

On something like this I would do a cost/benefit analysis.  I don't have enough money to buy new things just because they sound cool.

 

I installed my own solar system before there were any companies in Florida installing solar-electric systems.  My break even happened 5 1/2 years after installation.  Except for occasional battery (lead-acid) replacement, the electricity I now get from it is free.

 

The Tesla system uses lithium batteries so it is going to be more efficient than mine is.  (But likely much more costly.)

[Karl]

On something like this I would do a cost/benefit analysis.  I don't have enough money to buy new things just because they sound cool.

 

I installed my own solar system before there were any companies in Florida installing solar-electric systems.  My break even happened 5 1/2 years after installation.  Except for occasional battery (lead-acid) replacement, the electricity I now get from it is free.

 

The Tesla system uses lithium batteries so it is going to be more efficient than mine is.  (But likely much more costly.)

 

Is that a direct cost benefit of using your solar panels as opposed to using grid power, or does that include a 'feed in' subsidy ? obviously the amount of solar power is related to geography. In the UK solar power only pays due to subsidised installation cost, subsidised solar technology paid by all energy users as 'green tax' and a subsidised feed in tariff which completely negates any investment/maintenance cost for running the entire grid. In other words it's another state boondoggle which shifts the cost burden of solar energy onto those who don't have/can't afford solar energy.

 

Tesla is another state subsidised boondoggle, but it's apparent that saying so is tantamount to blasphemy. Their much heralded super fast charging stations are powered by full time diesel generators. It's actually more polluting to run a Tesla if an owner makes use of these 'fast charging' stations than it is to run a big old V8 gas burner. Essentially a Tesla is a rich mans play thing, or pennatance for the environmentalist 'sinner' who seeks to assuage his conscience whilst jetting around the world, or playing on his yacht.

[Marblehead]

Yes, I know that most countries in Europe are subsidizing the purchase and installation of solar power.  Germany was the first to get serious with this.

 

Many situations here in the US now are giving tax credits for purchase and installation which is about the same thing.

 

The requirements for qualifying for tax credit were too expensive to the point where qualifying would have eaten all my savings from the solar power so I opted out.

 

My system is stand-alone, off grid.  I don't have enough panels for an excess.  And there is just enough power to run my fish pond pumps most of the day and one during the night if I get enough sunshine.

 

The main reason for Europe going solar is to reduce the reliance on imported oil.  Mine was just to be more ecology-minded.  My little Honda car has solar panels on it too.

 

Yes, I agree, the Tesla is a rich man's toy.  I doubt one could ever make break even unless they had a massive number of panels.

 

I occasionally have to charge my batteries with commercial power if I don't get enough sunshine for a couple days in a row.  Sure, I could set up a generator to do that but the cost of fuel would be more expensive than using commercial power.

 

But still, I think there will be some who opt into the Tesla system.  With enough panels and lithium batteries it could a nice system. 

 

Still, right now, lithium batteries are too expensive for me to consider converting to those.

Edited December 10, 2015 by Marblehead

[bluefire]

Their much heralded super fast charging stations are powered by full time diesel generators.

Can you give a reference for this beeing a common method? All I was able to find was a click bait article about one place in California "behind harris ranch" which supposedly is only open to locals by invitation:

 

As Tesla is paying for the charging it sounds rather unlikely they would choose diesel generators over the cheaper power grid.

[thelerner]

Tesla's Power Wall was not the game changer I was hoping for.  But, its relatively new.  The idea is good and maybe it will evolve, get cheaper as well as storing more energy faster.   Cheaper and more efficient solar energy will highly effect it sales and cheap oil and gas will slow it.  At a certain point it might live up to its hype, if not here, then in places that have no or poor grids where solar is more viable. 

 

Who knows, in 20 years it could change the paradigm of needing giant centralized power stations into every house or neighborhood taking care of itself. 

 

Natural gas has gotten so cheap, it'd be interesting to see if a natural gas back up generator is cheaper then what people pay a utility for.  It might be.  I couldn't find hard numbers in my first quick google searches. 

 

 

add on> My hope for Tesla cars is that the research and tech trickles down to the rest of the industry.  Much of it's design and philosophy is brilliant.  For that alone I hope it survives and thrives. 

Edited December 10, 2015 by thelerner

[Karl]

Can you give a reference for this beeing a common method? All I was able to find was a click bait article about one place in California "behind harris ranch" which supposedly is only open to locals by invitation:

As Tesla is paying for the charging it sounds rather unlikely they would choose diesel generators over the cheaper power grid.

 

Where they are not 'tied to the grid' then they are forced into using diesel generators rather than reliance on solar cells and battery storage.

 

I have yet to find an example of his wholly, solar powered supercharger station.

[bluefire]

Where they are not 'tied to the grid' then they are forced into using diesel generators rather than reliance on solar cells and battery storage.

Ok that's a rare exception but not the norm like it sounded above:

 

Their much heralded super fast charging stations are powered by full time diesel generators. It's actually more polluting to run a Tesla if an owner makes use of these 'fast charging' stations than it is to run a big old V8 gas burner.

Edited December 10, 2015 by bluefire

[Karl]

Ok that's a rare exception but not the norm like it sounded above:

 

I was responding to the Tesla power wall post and not about the general connectivity of the charging stations.

 

[Bud Jetsun]

Interesting as an insider and developer to see the rampant and vocal confusion, and grasping mis-perceptions shared so freely.  

 

Ignorance is the cement that strengthens the illusions of knowing. 

 

It is optional for a forum to become a contest of who can become the most confidently and competently deluded. 

[Nungali]

Is that a direct cost benefit of using your solar panels as opposed to using grid power, or does that include a 'feed in' subsidy ? obviously the amount of solar power is related to geography. In the UK solar power only pays due to subsidised installation cost, subsidised solar technology paid by all energy users as 'green tax' and a subsidised feed in tariff which completely negates any investment/maintenance cost for running the entire grid. In other words it's another state boondoggle which shifts the cost burden of solar energy onto those who don't have/can't afford solar energy. Tesla is another state subsidised boondoggle, but it's apparent that saying so is tantamount to blasphemy. Their much heralded super fast charging stations are powered by full time diesel generators. It's actually more polluting to run a Tesla if an owner makes use of these 'fast charging' stations than it is to run a big old V8 gas burner. Essentially a Tesla is a rich mans play thing, or pennatance for the environmentalist 'sinner' who seeks to assuage his conscience whilst jetting around the world, or playing on his yacht.

 

 

Wonderful !    A friend visited yesterday, I decided to test it;

 

 

Me; "have you heard about the new Tesla batteries coming out ?"

 

Her; "Oh yes! They sound great ! "

 

"Okay, what do you actually know about them , how they work, etc . "

 

"Well ....  I dont actually know how they work, but apparently it produces its own electricity ... or its extra efficient  ... or ... actually, come to think about it ...   what do they do again ? "

 

" No, that;s okay, just tell me what you think, I am wondering what their marketing has done to popular opinion. "

 

"Well,  .... didnt Tesla design it ? "

 

" Ahhh, no, its a brand name.  Their site says that a solar panel powers the battery and you can then use that power at night when the sun isnt out. "

 

Her;     

 

 

From the Powerwall site : " Solar electricity at night - Powerwall stores electricity generated by solar panels during the day and makes it available to your home in the evening. This bridges the gap between peak solar and peak demand, allowing you to use your photons when you need them. "

 

 

From Origin Energy; " “Origin is providing customers with a simple, no-fuss solution by allowing them to buy their solar system, inverter and battery product from us, have it installed and monitored by us and enjoy the benefits of our post sales service support,” says Origin’s CEO of energy markets, Frank Calabria. "

 

Allowing them to buy  

 

Frank   Calabria     !       ( Isn't that the home of the Mafia ???   

[Nungali]

Yes, I know that most countries in Europe are subsidizing the purchase and installation of solar power.  Germany was the first to get serious with this.

 

Many situations here in the US now are giving tax credits for purchase and installation which is about the same thing.

 

The requirements for qualifying for tax credit were too expensive to the point where qualifying would have eaten all my savings from the solar power so I opted out.

 

My system is stand-alone, off grid.  I don't have enough panels for an excess.  And there is just enough power to run my fish pond pumps most of the day and one during the night if I get enough sunshine.

 

The main reason for Europe going solar is to reduce the reliance on imported oil.  Mine was just to be more ecology-minded.  My little Honda car has solar panels on it too.

 

Yes, I agree, the Tesla is a rich man's toy.  I doubt one could ever make break even unless they had a massive number of panels.

 

I occasionally have to charge my batteries with commercial power if I don't get enough sunshine for a couple days in a row.  Sure, I could set up a generator to do that but the cost of fuel would be more expensive than using commercial power.

 

But still, I think there will be some who opt into the Tesla system.  With enough panels and lithium batteries it could a nice system. 

 

Still, right now, lithium batteries are too expensive for me to consider converting to those.

 

Agreed !  It seems to be a marketing strategy ... this comment was significant ;

 

" Both Tesla and SolarCity are just getting started, trying to get some traction before Tesla's massive $5 billion battery factory begins production next year. That's when the battery market really gets interesting. "

[Nungali]

Tesla's Power Wall was not the game changer I was hoping for.  But, its relatively new.  The idea is good and maybe it will evolve, get cheaper as well as storing more energy faster.   Cheaper and more efficient solar energy will highly effect it sales and cheap oil and gas will slow it.  At a certain point it might live up to its hype, if not here, then in places that have no or poor grids where solar is more viable. 

 

Who knows, in 20 years it could change the paradigm of needing giant centralized power stations into every house or neighborhood taking care of itself. 

 

Natural gas has gotten so cheap, it'd be interesting to see if a natural gas back up generator is cheaper then what people pay a utility for.  It might be.  I couldn't find hard numbers in my first quick google searches. 

 

 

add on> My hope for Tesla cars is that the research and tech trickles down to the rest of the industry.  Much of it's design and philosophy is brilliant.  For that alone I hope it survives and thrives. 

 

 

Yes, this battery is great for cars, where compact and lightness are essential ....   but a house doesnt need to move around like a car    .   a sensible thrifty person won't mind their batteries out of sight in a shed or under the house, etc. 

 

But if you are not sensible or thrifty and want 'green  street cred' admiration ;

 

 

[Nungali]

Interesting as an insider and developer to see the rampant and vocal confusion, and grasping mis-perceptions shared so freely.  

 

Ignorance is the cement that strengthens the illusions of knowing. 

 

It is optional for a forum to become a contest of who can become the most confidently and competently deluded. 

 

Well ????   Clear it up then !     Dont just sit there in some kind of high-falutin disdain .  

 

Show me where Tesla Powerwall   gives clear and precise, easy to access  info for  someone interested in getting one.  I checked their sites and got near zilch real info and a bunch of emotive marketing hype. It wasnt until I found that site in my OP that actually showed some spec viability. 

Edited December 11, 2015 by Nungali

[thelerner]

Yes, this battery is great for cars, where compact and lightness are essential ....   but a house doesnt need to move around like a car    .   a sensible thrifty person won't mind their batteries out of sight in a shed or under the house, etc. 

 

But if you are not sensible or thrifty and want 'green  street cred' admiration ;

I thought my post was acknowledging the faults and I was referring to the car more for trickle down tech, though the battery may prove better (or not) for larger business facilities then houses.  Maybe it'll take a billionaire like Bruce Wayne or Elon Musk to spend and/or generate enough hype to clean up this godforsaken town/environment. 

[Marblehead]

... who can become the most confidently and competently deluded. 

According to some members here I am very good at that.

[Geof Nanto]

I've had off-grid solar for many years and I'm reasonably well researched on the subject. I've found the skeptical comments here to be well informed and a welcome change from the usual starry-eyed nonsense with which otherwise intelligent people uncritically laud anything with so-called 'green' credentials.. 

[Nungali]

I thought my post was acknowledging the faults and I was referring to the car more for trickle down tech, though the battery may prove better (or not) for larger business facilities then houses.  Maybe it'll take a billionaire like Bruce Wayne or Elon Musk to spend and/or generate enough hype to clean up this godforsaken town/environment. 

 

sorry I used 'generic you'  ...  I meant  ;  But if     you are  one is      not sensible or thrifty and want 'green  street cred' admiration ;

[Nungali]

I've had off-grid solar for many years and I'm reasonably well researched on the subject. I've found the skeptical comments here to be well informed and a welcome change from the usual starry-eyed nonsense with which otherwise intelligent people uncritically laud anything with so-called 'green' credentials.. 

 

Why are they saying all these people with heaps of solar panels on their roof are not storing the energy in batteries, but using the grid energy at night  ?  

 

Are there vast amounts of people in the USA doing that ? 

 

Check  out from 1.20   W T F ?   ....    'This is game changing'  

 

 

 

 

 

The whole point of having panels IMO is so I can have lighting and power at night !  

 

If they are aiming for the large rural market where a lot of solar is generated in Australia .... ummm , yeah, we know how it works and we have batteries now. 

 

There is hype about storing power off peak and using it at peak  , but that means you are drawing from the grid and have no panels ... or do both .  The only other info, a price for one, everything else was vague, no real specs. 

 

 

Hype;

 

[Marblehead]

There is noting that states that we have to have batteries with our solar system.

 

When the sun comes up we use the energy and when the sun goes down we go to sleep.

 

This would be ideal in parts of Africa and Australia.

 

Of course, cold storage of food would require the batteries or some other form of energy (propane?).

 

And then a small (maybe portable) solar system for a little lighting during the night if needed.

[Karl]

There is noting that states that we have to have batteries with our solar system.

 

When the sun comes up we use the energy and when the sun goes down we go to sleep.

 

This would be ideal in parts of Africa and Australia.

 

Of course, cold storage of food would require the batteries or some other form of energy (propane?).

 

And then a small (maybe portable) solar system for a little lighting during the night if needed.

 

Its about economics.

 

The best way for a population to improve their living standards is to increase productivity. To increase productivity there needs to be an increased use of energy to replace man power. If you had to power a plough it would require a field full of panels, or perhaps a farm full of panels. So, by using batteries, it is not so much that the energy is stored to run overnight, but that in becomes, in effect, capital energy-a store of unconsumed power which can be invested in automation improvements, increasing efficiency and therefore productive output. The farmer can use fewer solar panels, occupying less space, at reduced cost in both panels/wiring/land area and have the propulsive power at exactly the right time needed for ploughing.

 

 

[mostly_empty]

 The best way for a population to improve their living standards is to increase productivity. To increase productivity there needs to be an increased use of energy to replace man power.....

 

I used to believe such things. But really I don't at this point. 

 

The second point first - there is no reason why productivity needs to be tied to increased use of power. Classic examples - people in scandanvia use less energy to heat their homes than was the case a few hundred years ago - not to mention cars and airplanes (hint, productivity has meant better, more efficient vehicles produced with less....). The long term efficiencies of design, insolation, KNOWLEDGE vastly outweigh brute force. There are labs everywhere trying to learn how to use less energy and pollution - usually modelled on nature!

 

The first point? The best estimates ecologists have been able to come up with are that functioning ecosystems outperform artificial ones. There was a lovely japanese study looking at the available nutrition from a forest vs the equivalent arable land... the forest outperformed and was rather maintenance free. The great north american prairies supported a higher sustainable yield from buffalo than they do now. 

 

The world needs to separate social difficulties (like who to properly manage commons; how to distribute food; how to plan over generations) from technical ones! Because the best technical solutions use less energy and waste than the bad ones. 

[mostly_empty]

Of course, cold storage of food would require the batteries or some other form of energy (propane?).

 

Why? Easy example

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/solar-refrigeration/

 

The Toronto Zoo uses low nighttime electricity rates to generate ice which then supports cooling during the day. Scalable, local ... and easy to reverse if your "cheap" energy arrives during the day. 

[Karl]

I used to believe such things. But really I don't at this point. 

 

The second point first - there is no reason why productivity needs to be tied to increased use of power. Classic examples - people in scandanvia use less energy to heat their homes than was the case a few hundred years ago - not to mention cars and airplanes (hint, productivity has meant better, more efficient vehicles produced with less....). The long term efficiencies of design, insolation, KNOWLEDGE vastly outweigh brute force. There are labs everywhere trying to learn how to use less energy and pollution - usually modelled on nature!

 

The first point? The best estimates ecologists have been able to come up with are that functioning ecosystems outperform artificial ones. There was a lovely japanese study looking at the available nutrition from a forest vs the equivalent arable land... the forest outperformed and was rather maintenance free. The great north american prairies supported a higher sustainable yield from buffalo than they do now. 

 

The world needs to separate social difficulties (like who to properly manage commons; how to distribute food; how to plan over generations) from technical ones! Because the best technical solutions use less energy and waste than the bad ones. 

 

Production improves because production techniques improve. That there are more and less efficient ways to produce isn't even in need of an argument- consequently I don't need to offer any alternative.

 

A guy sat in a hut in Africa is, like as not going to be a farmer of something. I don't know what he will farm, but I know that he will be more productive with a water pump, irrigation system, tractor, trailer etc. All of these things require more power than he currently uses. To say his energy requirements are limited to running his hut alone will deprive him of the opportunity to produce sufficient to sell to meet his needs and accumulate sufficient additional capital for expansion/hard times.

 

I'm unsure why you say that you used to believe it was true and now you don't ?

 

Production takes energy. The higher up the production ladder, the greater the input. Mining, forestry, refining, drilling, ore conversion take enormous quantities of energy. There are parts of the processes that can be made more efficient and these are attended to as part of the producers need to keep his overheads as low as possible. No one wants to spend more on energy than they need to. Efficiency and innovation are built into laissez faire markets by competition.

 

Managing the commons is impossible, the only way to allocate scarce resource is by private ownership of all productive space. The market- when it is allowed to-takes care of resource allocation and the law takes care of those who trespass/cheat.

 

The reason countries remain poor is that the government refuses to let people buy land on which to begin production, or it taxes them so heavily they are unable to ever accumulate sufficient capital. These two things; private property and capital accumulation are absolutely essential to wealth creation, but a thug with a government badge and gun can destroy that possibility by continually looting the productive until they cease to try and support themselves.