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

131–140 of 363 posts

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

#131

Post by KptMarchewa »

derriz wrote: post #116
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...

2022, not 2023. That was due to one time effect of corrosion repairs.

For 2023 and 2024 EDF was profitable, with net income of those two years exceeding that 2022 loss.

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

#132

Post by KptMarchewa »

alecco wrote: post #71
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…

Nothing to be proud of. Dangerous ancient reactors owned by an almost bankrupt company about to be nationalized. https://www.lemonde.fr/en/france/article/2023/02/03/the-long...

>almost bankrupt company

"Published on February 3, 2023"

Since then, in 2023 and 2024 EDF posted over 10 billion a year profits.

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

#133

Post by bradlys »

potato3732842 wrote: post #119
bradlys wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's a publicly traded company. Feel free to do your research.

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

#134

Post by nharada »

nextworddev wrote: post #129
nharada wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you say that? I don’t know this space very well

Dumping batteries is yet another strategy to take control of global energy infrastructure and destabilize petrodollar

Oh yeah I get what you’re saying but is that a thing? Like CATL has had lines before that aren’t making a profit?

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

#135

Post by bradlys »

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.

PG&E's problems are caused by malcompliance and the rules being written by a public traded company instead of by an accountable government. There are plenty of people living in the woods in other states that aren't causing massive wildfires that cover the US in smoke every season.

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

#136

Post by MaxL93 »

derriz wrote: post #116
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...

It should be noted that most of EDF's massive losses are due to the ARENH.

The European Union insists that EDF must sell energy at very discounted prices, so that third-party "providers" can make an entry on the energy market. The idea was that they would eventually sell their own energy supply, but most just pocketed the difference between the dirt-cheap energy & what they charged customers, then ran away the moment there was any hint of change on the horizon.

Or, to put it in simpler, blunter terms: in the name of "competition", EDF was forced to heavily subsidize companies that turned out to be nothing more than rent-seekers that only sought to, effectively, grab free subsidy money.

Here are some articles about it:

2022: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/aug/10/edf-sues-fr... 2023: https://www.ft.com/content/e2fc3abf-4803-4561-8ef2-0c77fd2d0... 2024: https://www.bruegel.org/policy-brief/europes-under-radar-ind...

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

#137

Post by 0cf8612b2e1e »

ajross wrote: post #101
0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not know why this particular one gets engineers so annoyed. Energy and power are synonymous in conversation with normal people. There is very little real world scenarios where people would be exposed to the precise meanings -of course everyone gets it wrong.

But the premise of the comment I was replying to was exasperation that journalists got it wrong!

No, you were right on the money. Just idly thinking out loud why this is even an issue. Muggles get technical details wrong all the time. Yet any article about energy is going to get a few people riled up when the units are wrong.

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

#138

Post by bryanlarsen »

nextworddev wrote: post #125
nharada wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CATL is claiming mass production of their sodium-ion batteries starts in December, with a target price of $10/kWh. If that ends up even partway true it'll completely change the economics of power storage.

CATL is just dumping

CATL had a profit of $2.6B last quarter on sales of $15B. That indicates they're pricing well above cost rather than below it.

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

#139

Post by jeffbee »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #127
jeffbee wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will only put this down once because I repeat it in many threads and I'm sure people are tired of hearing it, but the reason that isolated municipal utilities are offering great prices locally is that they are free-riding on things that PG&E ratepayers bought.

> they are free-riding on things that PG&E ratepayers bought Genuinely curious, how is that the case for Silicon Valley Power?

How do you think SVP buys energy from its contracted generators? They don't own transmission from those places (unlike SMUD which, to an incomplete extent, actually does own its generating assets and transmission lines). SVP pays regulated wholesale distribution rates to PG&E to get access to their contracted generators. But the process determining such rates ignores the way that wildfire liability is assigned to PG&E, which is a significant part of current PG&E retail rates. It also ignores mandates such as rural electrification. PG&E must serve every yokel in California no matter how far out, while SVP and other MUDs contribute nothing to rural electrification mandates.

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

#140

Post by skybrian »

jaggederest wrote: post #78
pfdietz wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the prospects for flow batteries were becoming fairly dire due to the decline in cost of Li-ion cells. LFP promises better fire behavior than older Li-ion technologies, I think.

I suspect for extremely large batteries or seasonal shifting (summer->winter) flow batteries will still have a place, but I could be wrong.

Thermal batteries make more sense for that, but they need to be super-cheap. One possibility:

https://austinvernon.site/blog/standardthermal.html

Post reply on HN