Quote:
Originally Posted by Renato1
Hi Ray,
What their site says is that one US$3000 unit will run your fridge for a day and enable you to do one load of washing. If you only had one unit, and you disconnected from your grid power - then on sunny days you wouldn't have much power to do stuff like run electric ovens, electric stoves, air conditioners, electric heater, electric hot water. On non-sunny days, you'd have to fire up a diesel generator.
Suppose that everyone bought one or more of these devices. Then the "savings" would disappear, because the electricity suppliers would have to raise their price of off-peak power, and charge for supplying the baseload.
Else they would go broke and close down the generators. At the moment they are effectively supplying the baseload for free.
At the moment, when the winds generators are feeding into the grid - usually at a peak power time of the day, the coal generators can't reduce their output because they can't turn off the generators. They just shed the power. There is no reduction in coal usage. Now add to this situation millions of these Powerwalls reducing demand at peak period on sunny days. And the power generators have to have capacity going for peak period on non-sunny and non- windy days - and there is a big problem. Yes, they can build gas-fired generators which are easier to turn off and on - but it costs a lot of money to build a gas fired generator to just sit there being run intermittently. It wouldn't be economic without it being paid for by a baseload charge on everybody.
In other words, the Powerwall is good for frugal individuals, but only for as long as everyone else doesn't do the same. But not everyone will join in because a third or so of the population are renters, who are unlikely to have their own solar panels and Powerwalls. Most likely they will be subsidizing the richer land owners, as they are doing now.
Regards,
Renato
|
Hi Renato.
Your arguments only apply if you go fully off-grid, but there is no requirement to do that. I don't see this as being a way to go off-grid - but it does put solar energy right up there as a fully viable alternative energy source - and one that is now much more cost competitive in the retail environment.
Renewables definitely will change the way the utilities behave. However, it is not correct to say that there is no reduction in carbon pollution when renewables are operating. In South Australia we average >30% power from wind, but have enough wind capacity to meet over 100% of power needs in suitable conditions. This can result in a huge reduction in carbon burning - eg over a windy 5 day period last year there were occasions when wind power went to around 100% and then - "The impact on the rest of the generation fleet was considerable. ... during this period all of the thermal power stations in SA were shut down, with the exception of the two units at the coal fired Northern Power station, each of which ran at about 60 per cent of full load, and one of the four units at the gas fired Torrens Island B station, which was running at about 25 per cent of full load". This extreme level of pollution reduction is clearly only going to happen in exceptional circumstances with the current wind capacity, but I assume that there will be a much more general reduction in carbon pollution when we reach the capacity goal of 50% average power from wind. If local storage can flatten out timing of the (20-25% peak) solar capacity, the utilities can reduce their reserve capacity even further, with even less pollution.
I think that affordable storage is the final piece in the solar jigsaw - I really think that we are seeing the first stages of a revolution in power generation and delivery that is similar in scope to that faced by fixed phone and postal services. It is going to change the status quo and the utility companies will have to modify their business models. They will kick and scream, but we will still end up with a much changed environment over the next couple of decades. Maybe one day we will finally be able to get rid of some of those ugly power poles
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by g__day
Trina have also soft launched their rather well position but (in my view 50%-60%) over-priced solutions - which are Lithium based storage plus inverter - in decent sizes and maximum power out ratings - but at $1,200 USD a kWh they did an oppsie. About $800 a kWh is the target I reckon must be hit for an economical solution.
The one I am really keen of seeing and what price point they hit are the modular 1.2kWh Enphase systems - as I love web based controlled, individually controllable and programmable storage solutions. A system with Enphase micro-inverters on any decent solar panel, plus Enphase storage on the new Enphase Gateway-S would be a killer design in my view. Time will tell as these technologies are now well less than 12 months away.
|
thanks for that info Matthew - exciting times eh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrahamL
I have few friends who are completely off grid and its definately a differant lifestyle choice for sure , not thats a bad thing .
One I know generates and stores his power through wind and solar his home is just like any other to look at , his large timber shed out back was donated by another dissmantled and rebuilt , he does have a small petrol generater which rarely gets used ( washing machines and a family drain power ), hes got a recycled fuel bowser pump attached to it so he can fill his water supply tank up the hill or generate power. Milks a cow , keeps chickens and grows his own veges.
|
Hi Graham. I had not though of using this sort of technology to go fully off grid, but I suppose it would be possible if you could reduce the standard of living. Maybe the next generation of solar power storage will allow full and affordable off-grid without a living standard penalty.
regards Ray