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

Tesla Energy

teslamotors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 590 posts

Re: Tesla Energy

#491

Post by ProAm »

pkulak wrote: post #434
chrisamiller wrote: post #431

A quick analysis of our local (St Louis) rates for an average (1700 sq ft) suburban house indicate that time shifting to get peak rate savings isn't worth it: Payback time on the 10kWh battery would be around 26 years, and on the 7kWh battery would be 33 years. So, at least in the midwest, I think you'd have to be either using a ton of peak energy or coupling the battery pack with solar to make the investment worth i…

And as long as utilities are forced to buy back electricity at market-or-higher rates, there's zero incentive to every use a battery system with solar.

It's perfect for data centers that need UPS and generators for outages.

Re: Tesla Energy

#492

Post by DaniFong »

robot wrote: post #455

I think this is a move that will break the focus rule for a startup. Batteries _and_ cars. There is room for only one.

Wright brothers: focus on wings or controls or engines! you only have room for one!

Apple: focus on hardware or software! Macs or iPods. You only have room for one.

Edison: focus on lights or electricity! You only have room for one.

Uber: focus on the driver network or the app! You only have room for one.

It's not a hard and fast rule. The point of focus is to get you to prioritize what important, but something you need to do multiple things.

Re: Tesla Energy

#493

Post by robot »

DaniFong wrote: post #492
robot wrote: post #455

I think this is a move that will break the focus rule for a startup. Batteries _and_ cars. There is room for only one.

Wright brothers: focus on wings or controls or engines! you only have room for one! Apple: focus on hardware or software! Macs or iPods. You only have room for one. Edison: focus on lights or electricity! You only have room for one. Uber: focus on the driver network or the app! You only have room for one. It's not a hard and fast rule. The point of focus is to get you to prioritize what important, but something you n…

The problem with all of your examples is they still only sell one thing. Tesla now sells 2 things. That means sales, marketing team, strategy, support, for 2 things. Like, having 2 companies.

Re: Tesla Energy

#494

Post by mrtron »

I live in a condo in Toronto, and peak hour electricity is more than double non-peak. How do I install this and have it charge during off hours and use the battery during peak?

Re: Tesla Energy

#495

Post by mrtron »

I live in a condo in Toronto, and peak hour electricity is more than double non-peak. How do I install this and have it charge during off hours and use the battery during peak?

Re: Tesla Energy

#496

Post by kbenson »

bloaf wrote: post #453
chrisamiller wrote: post #431

A quick analysis of our local (St Louis) rates for an average (1700 sq ft) suburban house indicate that time shifting to get peak rate savings isn't worth it: Payback time on the 10kWh battery would be around 26 years, and on the 7kWh battery would be 33 years. So, at least in the midwest, I think you'd have to be either using a ton of peak energy or coupling the battery pack with solar to make the investment worth i…

Isn't that the idea though? Solar + battery + electric car = no gasoline, electricity, or natural gas bill. If the average car gasoline bill is $3000/year, electricity is $1000/year, and we demand a 5-year payback, we can spend at most $20,000 on a solar+battery+car system over what we would spend on a conventional gasoline-car and grid-house.

Unless we actually started taxing carbon emissions, in which case you could see those numbers change very quickly. I'm not saying it's likely, but you can't assume your future payments for specific items will stay consistent years in the future.

Re: Tesla Energy

#497

Post by toomuchtodo »

danans wrote: post #490
toomuchtodo wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Electric bills in Hawaii can top $1000/month.

IIRC, that's because of the silly way (given Hawaii's abundant solar and geothermal resources) in which most electricity is generated in Hawaii: burning imported fossil fuels. If the local renewables were fully exploited, I can't think of a reason for costs to be so high.

You're right! Hawaii's utility is fighting against solar installations, and I see Tesla's energy solution coming in to push the uptake of solar installs in Hawaii.

You don't have to wait on the utility for their approval if you're not connected to them.

Re: Tesla Energy

#498

Post by edwhitesell »

NickM wrote: post #449
edwhitesell wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have the opposite problem: Living in Texas, my garage easily gets above 110F many days during the summer (it would be crazy to pay for A/C in it). But, I'm also not going to put the battery pack(s) "inside" my house (e.g. utility/laundry room).

But, I'm also not going to put the battery pack(s) "inside" my house (e.g. utility/laundry room). Why not? The whole point to making it wall-mounted is that it won't take up any substantial amount of space. A utility/laundry room seems like exactly the logical place that you would want to put it.

My electrical panel is in the garage. Knowing my existing plans to add solar panels, a generator and transfer switch that's the only place battery pack(s) could go. Except it will be above the max temperature for a good period of time, and even below the minimum other times.

Sure, there could be some trade off where it makes sense to add heat and A/C to my garage (and appropriate insulation) based on the economics. But, that's even more I need to spend.

Re: Tesla Energy

#499

Post by walkon »

maxsilver wrote: post #483
andor436 wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also live in Michigan, and can tell you it will be a money loser for one major reason: the full cost of the system you install will be added to your local property tax valuation, as the state tax exemption on renewable energy equipment was nullified several years ago and never replaced. In my case I had $500 in taxes added to my annual bill, which outpaces the value of the energy I produce and creates an infinite p…

> the full cost of the system you install will be added to your local property tax valuation Why is that? And are you absolutely certain it's true? I also live in Michigan, and I've never heard of this. I've replaced major appliances before without it impacting my property tax assessment -- including appliances that have cost more than the Tesla Battery pack and been inspected+verified by the city (such as a new 96%…

A property would be assessed at a lower value if it didn't have any HVAC appliances installed in it. Since most properties start with such appliances, replacing them or upgrading them to similar, or even more efficient models, is likely considered a nominal effect on property value, i.e. an act of sustaining the properties existing value. A real battery backup system, assuming one didn't already exist on the property, would be considered a significant addition to property value.

Re: Tesla Energy

#500

Post by rhino369 »

billions wrote: post #464
rhino369 wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) You don't need this if you have solar. Most states and utilities have pretty favorable subsidies for "selling back" energy to the grid. The utility is credit the feeding back to the grid at 100%. This device will introduce efficiency losses and it is expensive. Unless you have extreme peak v. non-peak fees, I doubt this will save you money. Even at 20 cent difference, 7kW hours is a 1.40 a day. But that assumes th…

I see this product targeted at current tesla owners. A PowerWall driven supercharger in-house could reduce charge times by 80%. Today's 10 hour charge time is a huge inconvenience compared to a 10 minute gas station run.

Doesn't Telsa already sell a product like that?
Post reply on HN