Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California invests in battery energy storage, leaving rolling blackouts behind

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 363 posts

Re: California invests in battery energy storage, leaving rolling blackouts behind

#111

Post by JumpCrisscross »

nandomrumber wrote: post #74
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That information does not fit the narrative so it is left unsaid This is a good opportunity to calibrate your sense of truth. The LA Times is owned by this South African-born immigrant [1]. (Himself the the son of "Chinese immigrant parents who fled China during the Japanese occupation.") He is, like Elon, pro-Trump (after, like Musk, supporting Democrats when they were in power) [2]. And he, like Elon, has censore…

It does mention another battery manufacturer, Spark. Where do they fit in to the narrative?

> Where do they fit in to the narrative?

What narrative? If you're saying even a pro-Trump pro-Elon newspaper whose owner has a history of weighing in for Musk has a bias against him, you're saying Elon's massively lost not only standing but also sympathy across the aisle.

If that's true, his companies are toast. That doesn't seem to be the case. So maybe revisit the hypothesis when the data reject it.

Re: California invests in battery energy storage, leaving rolling blackouts behind

#112

Post by delabay »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #109
delabay wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By my estimate (GPT5) Tesla has up to 17% of all front and behind the meter battery storage in CA, and is also the vendor growing the fastest in CA. The California battery storage story is also a Tesla story, but based on the positive tone of the article, it clearly made more sense to leave Tesla out of it.

> By my estimate (GPT5) Please don't do this.

What's your source?

Re: California invests in battery energy storage, leaving rolling blackouts behind

#113

Post by JumpCrisscross »

Braxton1980 wrote: post #102
hagbard_c wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That information does not fit the narrative so it is left unsaid.

How do you know that's the reason?

> How do you know that's the reason?

Just noticed that their profile basically taunts that they're a troll [1].

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=hagbard_c

Re: California invests in battery energy storage, leaving rolling blackouts behind

#114

Post by sgustard »

bradlys wrote: post #37
Lammy wrote: post #27

I don't really care if the power stays on for five-nines as long as I'm still paying 61¢/kW-h for it :/ https://www.pge.com/assets/pge/docs/account/rate-plans/resid...

Criminally overpriced. We're not getting shit for it either. God forbid you live in any of the more woody parts of California either. You'll have to have your own battery or generator anyway. As someone who plans to live in the Santa Cruz Mountains long term, I will be going completely off grid as PG&E will just cut power forever rather than fix anything.

Well the faster you get off the grid, the cheaper it'll be for the rest of us. All PGE's problems are caused by running powerlines for you through fire-prone kindling wilderness.

Re: California invests in battery energy storage, leaving rolling blackouts behind

#115

Post by jrflowers »

delabay wrote: post #87
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Interesting how they never mention that these are Tesla Megapack 2 XL units It's a story about California's battery storage. Tesla hasn't built all of that capacity. For a Tesla (or other battery producer) press release? Sure. For an article about the general phenomenon? Irrelevant to the point that if it were included I'd be suspicious of the article being a plant.

By my estimate (GPT5) Tesla has up to 17% of all front and behind the meter battery storage in CA, and is also the vendor growing the fastest in CA. The California battery storage story is also a Tesla story, but based on the positive tone of the article, it clearly made more sense to leave Tesla out of it.

> By my estimate (GPT5)

You know treating a thing that makes stuff up as a source of truth is the same thing as making stuff up right? You might as well have written By my estimate (as revealed to me in a dream)

Re: California invests in battery energy storage, leaving rolling blackouts behind

#116

Post by derriz »

cbmuser wrote: post #63

The electricity mix in France is still way cleaner than in California: - France: https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/FR/5y/yearly - California: https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/US-CAL-CISO/5y/year... And their kWh costs less than 20 Cents in the standard plan: - https://particulier.edf.fr/content/dam/2-Actifs/Documents/Of... They even offer flex prices going down as low as 12,32 Cents/kWh. Nuclear power…

Electricity prices are set by the French government not the wholesale cost or cost of production. Which is why EDF - the operator of the French nuclear fleet - regularly posts massive losses. Like the €18 billion loss in 2023.

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/france/article/2023/02/17/france-s...

Re: California invests in battery energy storage, leaving rolling blackouts behind

#117

Post by slashdave »

nodesocket wrote: post #66

"leaving rolling blackouts behind..." I'll take this bet CA blackouts aren't over.

You'll lose. Combined with solar, batteries are perfect. They cover the time of day when solar wanes, but air conditioning is still needed.

Re: California invests in battery energy storage, leaving rolling blackouts behind

#119

Post by potato3732842 »

bradlys wrote: post #91
potato3732842 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I will be going completely off grid as PG&E will just cut power forever rather than fix anything. Depending on where you live you, your neighbors and/or your predecessors likely a) voted for people who wrote laws to make that illegal b) sneered at anyone who wouldn't want to be on the grid.

It’s a capitalist run power grid in CA. It’s a publicly traded company. Nothing more capitalist than making my own power when the competition sucks ass.

If you think power infrastructure and supplying the electrons that jiggle on it are any sort of example of free market capitalism I have a bridge to sell you.

Re: California invests in battery energy storage, leaving rolling blackouts behind

#120

Post by Lammy »

sgustard wrote: post #114
bradlys wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Criminally overpriced. We're not getting shit for it either. God forbid you live in any of the more woody parts of California either. You'll have to have your own battery or generator anyway. As someone who plans to live in the Santa Cruz Mountains long term, I will be going completely off grid as PG&E will just cut power forever rather than fix anything.

Well the faster you get off the grid, the cheaper it'll be for the rest of us. All PGE's problems are caused by running powerlines for you through fire-prone kindling wilderness.

We could have had atomic energy generated right here in the Bay Area (Sonoma). You can actually go visit the “hole in Bodega Head” where PG&E started digging the reactor pit before being made to stop: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodega_Bay_Nuclear_Power_Plant
Post reply on HN