Tesla Energy • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla Energy

#121

Post by kondro » Fri, May 01, 2015, 5:46 AM UTC

kondro wrote: post #113

toomuchtodo wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At that price, you could've bought a larger capacity deep-cycle storage solution already readily available on the market with batteries that will last 20+ years. Citation? Deep cycle lead acid batteries have a maximum life expectancy of 5-8 years, even if aggressively managed.

Iron Edison talks about their Ni-Fe batteries lasting 25+ years. http://ironedison.com/iron-edison-usa-series-nickel-iron-nif...

They provide a 10 year warranty on their Ni-Fe batteries… but their spec sheets allow for a much longer lifespan: https://ironedison.com/renewable-energy-batteries

Re: Tesla Energy

#122

Post by frik » Fri, May 01, 2015, 5:47 AM UTC

kondro wrote: post #119

So why not solar power (1kW), storage (3.6kWh) with 25+ year life, inverter (2.8kW) and other electrical systems for just USD$8,702. The batteries are only USD$2,910 of that. http://ironedison.com/edison-power-plus-system

What if one has already dozens of photovoltaic solar panels, and just need a good energy storage solution that lasts many years? I trust Tesla more than some others companies that they can deliver it.

Re: Tesla Energy

#123

Post by BorisMelnik » Fri, May 01, 2015, 5:48 AM UTC

prostoalex wrote: post #47

This was offered to SolarCity customers in late 2014, I see that the image here http://www.solarcity.com/residential/backup-power-supply now reflects Tesla branding.

Iinteresting how they are branding it as a backup solution, while Tesla is branding it as a complete replacement.

"What if we could move the electricity grid off of fossil fuels" (Tesla)

vs

"Be prepared the next time the power goes out."(Solar City)

Re: Tesla Energy

#124

Post by kondro » Fri, May 01, 2015, 5:49 AM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #90

kondro wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

10kWh of deep-cycle batteries aren't that large. It's not like people in apartments are going to be using this product.

But they could now, and most deep cycle lead acid batteries are flooded, not sealed, which means they have to be ventilated to prevent hydrogen explosions hazards. Not so with Tesla's offering.

Fine. 4.8kW Li-Ion battery for USD$3,278

1.9kW for USD$1,678.

My point is that Tesla isn't really doing anything really unique here. Sure, they're giving it more press than anyone really has before, but the products aren't especially cheap, innovative or special.

http://ironedison.com/12-volt-lithium-battery-for-solar

Re: Tesla Energy

#125

Post by ljk » Fri, May 01, 2015, 5:52 AM UTC

it sounds so awesome, are there any reasons why I shouldn't get this?

Re: Tesla Energy

#126

Post by chrissyb » Fri, May 01, 2015, 5:52 AM UTC

daemin wrote: post #46

The maximum temperature will be an issue here in Australia. In a typical place where it will be mounted, i.e. the garage, the temperatures will readily get over 40, close to 50 during summer. I could see this also being a problem in places like Nevada and Arizona in the USA.

If your garage is getting to 50°C you've got a major insulation problem! Where are you located?

In both cases if min and max operating temperature are an issue it may be best to install in an FIP enclosure and use ducting to keep the enclosure and an optimal temperature.

Re: Tesla Energy

#127

Post by vonklaus » Fri, May 01, 2015, 5:54 AM UTC

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #49

milesf wrote: post #33

Today is a big deal. Open sourcing the patents to build fully solar-powered electrical grids around the will be a paradigm shift in the power structures of the world. I expect from today onward there will be a full-scale attack from those who stand to lose because of the reduced dependency on oil. First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.

> I expect from today onward there will be a full-scale attack from those who stand to lose because of the reduced dependency on oil. Maybe. But remember we don't have the technology yet to completely move away from fossil fuels. The biggest issue I know of is making Airplanes electric which so far has not proven really feasible (as far as I can find anyway). This solves a huge chunk of issues but there are still ple…

Elon has been working on an VTOL electric jet. He references his desire to fully develop it often. Obviously, he is extremely busy, but he says he will try and work on it at some point.

Re: Tesla Energy

#128

Post by reality_czech » Fri, May 01, 2015, 5:57 AM UTC

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #49

milesf wrote: post #33

Today is a big deal. Open sourcing the patents to build fully solar-powered electrical grids around the will be a paradigm shift in the power structures of the world. I expect from today onward there will be a full-scale attack from those who stand to lose because of the reduced dependency on oil. First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.

> I expect from today onward there will be a full-scale attack from those who stand to lose because of the reduced dependency on oil. Maybe. But remember we don't have the technology yet to completely move away from fossil fuels. The biggest issue I know of is making Airplanes electric which so far has not proven really feasible (as far as I can find anyway). This solves a huge chunk of issues but there are still ple…

Zepplins can be run with very minimal environmental cost. They are slower, though.

Airplanes are extremely energy-hungry and carbon-intensive. Just one intercontinental round trip can put as much carbon per person into the air as a half a year of driving, assuming you have a new-ish car. And yes, this is after dividing the total emissions by the number of passengers.

Re: Tesla Energy

#129

Post by marze » Fri, May 01, 2015, 5:58 AM UTC

kondro wrote: post #103

marze wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously there is a lot more than just the batteries. In solar systems, $7k is not a big amount compared to all the other expenses. I'm assuming you'd minimize your loads, it is silly to size your solar system for a business-as-usual set of loads.

You definitely could, but that will increase costs even further. You're potentially replacing all your lighting, climate-control, water heating, cleaning (dishes/clothes), cooking & fridge/s to be more energy efficient also. Actual power storage is a reasonably small cost (probably < 20%) in even the solar, power equipment (inverter, switches, controllers, etc), power-storage equation anyway if you want to go complet…

Going off grid isn't something one does lightly.

Re: Tesla Energy

#130

Post by toomuchtodo » Fri, May 01, 2015, 5:58 AM UTC

kondro wrote: post #124

toomuchtodo wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they could now, and most deep cycle lead acid batteries are flooded, not sealed, which means they have to be ventilated to prevent hydrogen explosions hazards. Not so with Tesla's offering.

Fine. 4.8kW Li-Ion battery for USD$3,278 1.9kW for USD$1,678. My point is that Tesla isn't really doing anything really unique here. Sure, they're giving it more press than anyone really has before, but the products aren't especially cheap, innovative or special. http://ironedison.com/12-volt-lithium-battery-for-solar

> Sure, they're giving it more press than anyone really has before

Ahh! But that's the most important part! Elon's portfolio companies are a pieces of an incredible future machine, all working together. Solar City is able to draw on Tesla's batteries, Tesla was able to draw on SpaceX for some of its engineering capabilities.

Tesla made electric cars sexy. Now, its making energy storage sexy. Clearly, marketing is important, and will be necessary for convincing the world a clean energy future is the right direction.