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

Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

rameznaam.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 231 posts

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#141

Post by bjelkeman-again »

ridgeguy wrote: post #127
driverdan wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you misunderstood something in this article. The only stored power that would be on the grid would be from the power companies themselves, not the end users. End users wouldn't resell the power, they'd use it themselves.

The growth of distributed solar + storage (i.e., zillions of residences having 10kW arrays and 25kWhr storage) is accelerating. Projections I've seen suggest that this distributed storage (which doesn't belong to the power companies) will be far larger than utility-scale storage such as discussed in the article. This presents real challenges in how to control that distributed storage and pay its owners for storage-re…

Why can't it just be a feed-in tariff? And if the consumer can consume using the network they can produce, in the other direction. The cable runs both ways, no?

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#142

Post by bjelkeman-again »

james-skemp wrote: post #27
mathgeek wrote: post #21

One thing that kept coming to mind while reading all of this article's details on different methods for storing and selling and buying power at the peaks and valley of pricing was this: Electricity in our homes is so widespread and popular because it just works. We don't need to think short-term about how or when we use it (although we should and can if you want to). You flip a switch, the light comes on, and you fli…

Renters. Every time I hear about advances in renewable energy I get a little sad. I've rented for the last decade plus, and unless I get married and decide to settle down, will probably continue to rent for the next decade plus. Homeownership would allow me to take advantage of these sorts of advances, but so would the ability to take advantage of this as a renter. Looks like only ~35% of US households rent, accordin…

Where I live, in Sweden, you can. I purchased shares in a wind power coop. It feeds me all the electricity I need wherever I live in the country, at cost of production. And with interest rates at effective zero here the investment is significantly better than having the money in the bank.

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#144

Post by john61 »

hyperbovine wrote: post #136
john61 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technologies also have risks. If the risk of a technology is the vast devastation of life it should not be used.

Compared with the vast devastation of life which is already taking place as a result of climate change? I'll take my chances with the nukes.

There are other possibilities than nuclear and fossil energy without those vast risks. The OP article is all about that. Nuclear is not a viable alternative energy.

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#145

Post by wallyhs »

diminoten wrote: post #99
wallyhs wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, they can't, because the folks who are commenting at what you think is that level are actually completely unqualified to do so. > The folks who are qualified to write articles and papers on the topics that might interest you, do exactly that. How could you possibly know who is qualified and who is not? Given that the authors of submitted articles frequently comment on HN themselves, it must be true that at least…

So you think I'm speaking to you as an authority figure?

No, but you seemed to imply that one can only learn from certain people in certain contexts. I find that I gain surprising insight from unexpected people at unexpected times. HN is not an exception.

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#146

Post by bjelkeman-again »

D_Alex wrote: post #133

One thing to add: Electric cars. They come with energy storage in-built. By rough calculation, if 10% of cars in my city (Perth, Australia) were electric, their batteries could supply the entire city's demand for duration of about 2 hours (or 10% of demand for 20 hours etc). This could work really well for demand balancing and peak shaving - overcapacity (which in Perth is massive, since the policy is to maintain sup…

There is going to be an interesting startup market around this is my prediction.

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#147

Post by [deleted] »

Animats wrote: post #52
classicsnoot wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my limited experience [1 windmill that i am currently working on] the biggest issue we are facing is lightning strike. The windmill is located on a small island .6 miles off of the coast of Maine. the structure rises 20+ feet over the tops of the trees. The Seawind is pretty consistent so wind seemed like a good idea, but the first strike fried the innards of the turbine and compromised the lines running to the ba…

You need a lightning protection consultant. Lightning protection is a solved problem - power lines, large communication towers, and wind farms are struck all the time, without serious problems. Doing it right can get expensive, but is quite possible. Grounding on hard rock is tough. There are methods for measuring ground conductivity, and in a situation like that, you'll need them.

[deleted]

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#148

Post by ghshephard »

Animats wrote: post #52
classicsnoot wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my limited experience [1 windmill that i am currently working on] the biggest issue we are facing is lightning strike. The windmill is located on a small island .6 miles off of the coast of Maine. the structure rises 20+ feet over the tops of the trees. The Seawind is pretty consistent so wind seemed like a good idea, but the first strike fried the innards of the turbine and compromised the lines running to the ba…

You need a lightning protection consultant. Lightning protection is a solved problem - power lines, large communication towers, and wind farms are struck all the time, without serious problems. Doing it right can get expensive, but is quite possible. Grounding on hard rock is tough. There are methods for measuring ground conductivity, and in a situation like that, you'll need them.

We have a lot of our equipment tested in Florida (where they have some large testing centers) for lightning tolerance. I've been told, that you don't actually verify the equipment can be safely struck by lightning - as anything that is hit by lightning, is immediately destroyed. The objective is to ensure that equipment nearby a lightning strike doesn't suffer secondary damage (possibly from a power surge in the line). We install lightning arrestors near our electronics, but anything that actually gets hit is replaced.

Airplanes though, are supposedly struck by lightning, and continue to work. I'm guessing that this has something do do with them being suspended in air, and not having a connection to ground.

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#149

Post by ghshephard »

ridgeguy wrote: post #125
afarrell wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem for nuclear is that with the way the bulk electricity market works, shaving off the peaks could hurt the ROI of building a new nuclear plant significantly. In New York and New England, suppliers bid in how much power they are willing to supply at a given price, the market operator runs a giant LP solver over the bids and transmission constraints between locations in order to satisfy demand in each locatio…

My understanding is that nuclear power is used to serve base load, which is the demand that isn't subject to significant variation. This allows generator owners to run nuclear generators at their cost-effective maximum output. It's true that there is great variation in electricity pricing, with peak shaving and other so-called "ancillary services" bringing as much as 100X as high a price as base rate (for a short per…

That's my understanding as well. Nuclear Power plants are base load, and are contracted to do such, with long term guaranteed capacity. Peaker Plants take on load that exceeds the base, are paid on the margin, but aren't guaranteed any particular load.

Re: Why Energy Storage Is About to Get Big – And Cheap

#150

Post by ridgeguy »

bjelkeman-again wrote: post #141
ridgeguy wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The growth of distributed solar + storage (i.e., zillions of residences having 10kW arrays and 25kWhr storage) is accelerating. Projections I've seen suggest that this distributed storage (which doesn't belong to the power companies) will be far larger than utility-scale storage such as discussed in the article. This presents real challenges in how to control that distributed storage and pay its owners for storage-re…

Why can't it just be a feed-in tariff? And if the consumer can consume using the network they can produce, in the other direction. The cable runs both ways, no?

It can be, but that doesn't capture the value a consumer with fast response, controllable generation/storage supplies to the grid. Compensating the consumer for power or storage they supply at a particular time is complicated.

Existing net metering pays a fixed rate for power supplied to the grid by, say, a solar-equipped residential grid customer.

But in fact, fast response power delivered to the grid when the grid managers call for it commands much higher prices in the dynamic electric power market. So does the ability to store power on demand (absorb power from the grid), when generation briefly exceeds supply.

So imagine a residential grid customer with local solar + storage that's controllable by the ISO (grid managers). Rather than net metering (a fixed feed-in tariff), the ISO should pay instantaneous market rate for power delivered, or absorbed by, the residential grid customer.

I think we'll soon converge on bidirectional power delivery/sink services that are controlled by either the ISO or perhaps by local smarts on the resident's grid-tie interface. That would engage the resident's system as a grid stability enhancement tool, and would bring more revenue to the resident than simple feed-in tariff schedules. One assumes the resident would participate by an opt-in choice in exchange for enhanced revenue.

Post reply on HN