Tesla’s Powerwall Will Let Households Run Entirely On Solar

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Tesla’s $3,000 Powerwall Will Let Households Run Entirely On Solar Energy

You almost certainly associate Tesla with cars — very cool cars — but the company has an even grander vision beyond that. Today, CEO and founder Elon Musk unveiled ‘Tesla Energy’ — a new business arm that is focused on ending our dependence on grid power and switching instead to solar energy.

The first Tesla Energy product is ‘Powerwall Home Battery,’ a stationary battery that can power a household without requiring the grid. The battery is rechargeable lithium-ion — it uses Tesla’s existing battery tech — and can be fixed to a wall, removing much of the existing complexity around using a local power source.

“The issue with existing batteries is that they suck,” Musk said in a press conference announcing Tesla Energy. “They are expensive, unreliable and bad in every way.”

Tesla’s solution, he said, is different.

[/quote][/p]

Read more at: techcrunch.com/2015/04/30/tesla-powerwall-home-battery/#.g29q6i:xwdX

[kent]

I predict a monumental flop. I'll let somebody else do the actual math but at first glance, after you factor in the cost of the Powerwall, plus installation, along with the cost of solar panels (roughly $25K for our house) and balance that against the cost per KWH, the ROI has to take close to two DECADES (that's presuming the battery system AND the solar panels both last that long which I'm sure they won't).

I'll wait until there's a major breakthrough in solar or whatever alternate system pops up.

[sesfw]

I've done a little investing in solar companies and none of them have done much. Someday a major breakthrough will come and I'll be right there.

Maybe this guy is on to something if he can design an inexpensive battery to match the demand.

[siralynn]

May 2, 2015 14:04:02 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

You're forgetting the favorable tax policy. Right now in California there are refundable tax credits for installing solar, which combine with the federal tax credits for doing it, so it covers half the cost or more and cuts the payback time way down.

Plunking down $25k in cash to cover the whole thing might not make sense, but when Uncle Sam will pay for half, and the solar company will do it for nothing out of pocket and zero interest payments equal to your previous electric bills each month it starts looking decent. I still haven't pulled the trigger because I have my doubts about how long the panels will last, but we're still considering it.

Having just installed solar panels (for about $29k), just wanted to mention that there actually is no more California tax credit. Fed is still 30% through the end of 2016 though.

DH is super intrigued by the powerwall concept. He's trying to convince my aunt and uncle (early adopters to many other technologies) to get one and evaluate it for us and maybe we can get one in a few years.

[kent]

Having just installed solar panels (for about $29k), just wanted to mention that there actually is no more California tax credit. Fed is still 30% through the end of 2016 though.

Was the $29K AFTER the federal tax credit or before?  I'm asking because the guy next door was recently quoted around $25K AFTER the credit and his house is identical to ours (that's where I got my $25K figure).

[Deleted]

Remember, new technology is ALWAYS much more expensive than it will be once it's been out for a while. This "powerwall" is new tech. the price is likely to come down once mass production kicks in.

I mean... look at the BluRay player... over $1,000 when introduced just about a decade ago. Now you can get them at Walmart for $50.

[kent]

May 2, 2015 18:36:18 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Remember, new technology is ALWAYS much more expensive than it will be once it's been out for a while. This "powerwall" is new tech. the price is likely to come down once mass production kicks in.

I mean... look at the BluRay player... over $1,000 when introduced just about a decade ago. Now you can get them at Walmart for $50.

You just HAD to remind me Richard   I remember when VCR's (remember those?) came out.  Me and three of my idiot friends went to the local TV store and talked them into a group discount.  All four of us walked out with the latest technology for only (I'll never forget) $842 per unit (which actually was a very good deal).

Now before you have coffee flying out of your nose.  These things were awesome.  You could set the time and station and for the "day" to record, your choice was "Today" "Tomorrow" or "Day after tomorrow"   

[EVT1]

My prediction is battery tech outpaces Tesla's new factory- but I think they will be able to adapt quickly.

It will happen- almost instant recharge, non-degradation, etc.

I wish my house wasn't covered by so many trees- would love to get in on this.

[siralynn]

May 2, 2015 17:28:56 GMT -5 kent said:

Having just installed solar panels (for about $29k), just wanted to mention that there actually is no more California tax credit. Fed is still 30% through the end of 2016 though.

Was the $29K AFTER the federal tax credit or before?  I'm asking because the guy next door was recently quoted around $25K AFTER the credit and his house is identical to ours (that's where I got my $25K figure).

Before. We paid $3.51 / DC watt. (Total system size 8.320 kW DC).

Most companies seemed to be quoting purchased residential systems at ~$3.80 / DC watt, but my employer has a group discount program that we were able to use to negotiate down a supplier whose design we preferred (better inverters mostly).

So far the panels have been on for about a week, and our meter is most definitely running backwards - even considering how often we charge our LEAF. It'll be interesting to track it over the course of the year. (DH has already built a bunch of spreadsheets and predictions...)

[resolution]

The new aluminum battery they are working on at Stanford looks quite promising. blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2015/04/07/aluminum-battery/

[Deleted]

May 3, 2015 9:32:04 GMT -5 siralynn said:

May 2, 2015 17:28:56 GMT -5 kent said:

Was the $29K AFTER the federal tax credit or before?  I'm asking because the guy next door was recently quoted around $25K AFTER the credit and his house is identical to ours (that's where I got my $25K figure).

Before. We paid $3.51 / DC watt. (Total system size 8.320 kW DC).

Most companies seemed to be quoting purchased residential systems at ~$3.80 / DC watt, but my employer has a group discount program that we were able to use to negotiate down a supplier whose design we preferred (better inverters mostly).

So far the panels have been on for about a week, and our meter is most definitely running backwards - even considering how often we charge our LEAF. It'll be interesting to track it over the course of the year. (DH has already built a bunch of spreadsheets and predictions...)

I pay 10 cents a Kw/Hr for the first 500 Kw/Hr. Then it drops to 7.8 cents per Kw/Hr. I belong to a non-profit customer owned electric co-op. We get a credit on the last bill of the year for money not spent on the system and power cost to the system. My yearly electric cost is about $1,000 for an all electric house. I do heat with wood on the colder winter days and nights. Solar panel companies love to advertise and install when the sun angle is high at this time of year. In the other half of the year when the approach angle is much lower. They (solar panels) will be much less effective. Not trying to rain on your parade, but the solar panel is the weak point of the system. They degrade in performance every year. The battery isn't even needed if the power company buys the excess wattage when produced.

[siralynn]

May 3, 2015 10:27:11 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

May 3, 2015 9:32:04 GMT -5 siralynn said:

Before. We paid $3.51 / DC watt. (Total system size 8.320 kW DC).

Most companies seemed to be quoting purchased residential systems at ~$3.80 / DC watt, but my employer has a group discount program that we were able to use to negotiate down a supplier whose design we preferred (better inverters mostly).

So far the panels have been on for about a week, and our meter is most definitely running backwards - even considering how often we charge our LEAF. It'll be interesting to track it over the course of the year. (DH has already built a bunch of spreadsheets and predictions...)

I pay 10 cents a Kw/Hr for the first 500 Kw/Hr. Then it drops to 7.8 cents per Kw/Hr. I belong to a non-profit customer owned electric co-op. We get a credit on the last bill of the year for money not spent on the system and power cost to the system. My yearly electric cost is about $1,000 for an all electric house. I do heat with wood on the colder winter days and nights. Solar panel companies love to advertise and install when the sun angle is high at this time of year. In the other half of the year when the approach angle is much lower. They (solar panels) will be much less effective. Not trying to rain on your parade, but the solar panel is the weak point of the system. They degrade in performance every year. The battery isn't even needed if the power company buys the excess wattage when produced.

That's why I said it will be interesting to see how it goes over the course of the year. The power company tracks our over generation during the summer months and will use that to offset the winter months. They'll "true-up" once a year.

Since we charge an electric car, we use much more electricity than the average household. Without the car, I don't think the costs would have made sense.

Our payback time should be about seven years, not counting any potential value the panels have added to the house. (In California at least, solar is a big yuppie status symbol at the moment. I've heard that in the South Bay, systems are actually designed to be specifically visible from the front of the house so it's very clear to everyone that you have panels...)

As far as raining on a parade, if my buying solar panels causes it to rain more often in California, I will consider that money damn well spent.

[kent]

For those confused about the difference between an AC and DC Watt, this should help (or not)

www.wholesalesolar.com/solar-information/ac-watt-dc-watt

I'd elaborate but my eyes are bleeding so badly I can barely see the screen!

[Deleted]

May 3, 2015 11:51:24 GMT -5 kent said:

For those confused about the difference between an AC and DC Watt, this should help (or not)

www.wholesalesolar.com/solar-information/ac-watt-dc-watt

I'd elaborate but my eyes are bleeding so badly I can barely see the screen!

The simple answer... Volts x Amps = Watts. It's exactly the same for DC or AC, so there is no difference. Maybe it would be a less misleading marketing approach to label it as inverter efficiency.

[kent]

The simple answer... Volts x Amps = Watts. It's exactly the same for DC or AC, so there is no difference. Maybe it would be a less misleading marketing approach to label it as inverter efficiency.
 

We may not know about trash compactors (a diif thread) but we all know that formula and it's the "misleading approach" that they use to get consumers SO tangled up they have no idea what they are buying.

[EVT1]

May 4, 2015 17:16:35 GMT -5 kent said:

The simple answer... Volts x Amps = Watts. It's exactly the same for DC or AC, so there is no difference. Maybe it would be a less misleading marketing approach to label it as inverter efficiency.
 

We may not know about trash compactors (a diif thread) but we all know that formula and it's the "misleading approach" that they use to get consumers SO tangled up they have no idea what they are buying.

Yep- everything is quite simple until marketing and advertising gets involved. Then it is bullshit on parade.

[EVT1]

May 4, 2015 18:24:19 GMT -5 alwaysbeoptimizing said:

May 2, 2015 23:49:42 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

My prediction is battery tech outpaces Tesla's new factory- but I think they will be able to adapt quickly.

It will happen- almost instant recharge, non-degradation, etc.

I wish my house wasn't covered by so many trees- would love to get in on this.

here you go

That's a zombie horde tool   Don't have any redwoods in the backyard.

[Deleted]

May 4, 2015 19:58:08 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

May 4, 2015 18:24:19 GMT -5 alwaysbeoptimizing said:

here you go

That's a zombie horde tool   Don't have any redwoods in the backyard.

If you get one, just don't hold it like he is... one hand half way up the "blade".

[happyhoix]

There is technology in the works for making an invisible coating that can be applied to windows and even roof shingles to make each window and each shingle a solar panel.

If they can perfect that and make it economical, and if there is a battery that effectively stores the extra energy for later use, it would revolutionize the electrical industry.

Sounds far fetched, but everyone told WIlbur and Orville Wright that they were nuts to try to fly, too.

[Deleted]

May 5, 2015 16:04:41 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

Solar will eventually work.  It might not be there yet, but it's getting cheaper and more efficient all the time.  Conversely fossil fuels get more and more expensive as we have to chase deposits that are harder and more expensive to access and process.

Technological advancements happen in all fields.  Like solar panels, fossil fuel efficiancy and extraction will also advance.  Not that long ago fracking was a plan for the future.  Now they're building natural gas power plants nationwide to take advantage of the abundance.  People will and are, buying  the most reliable and economical form of energy to satisfy their needs.  Right now solar panels are an intermittant and expensive source of energy versus fossil fuels.  Don't believe me ?  Just look at the size of the yearly global increase in fossil fuel usage.  Cheap and reliable. 

[ken a.k.a OMK]

Batteries to store excess solar power are not the answer. Systems that send the excess power to the utility for credit then you pay to get power from them when your solar isn't producing is the efficient way to go.

[Deleted]

May 5, 2015 16:00:26 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

There is technology in the works for making an invisible coating that can be applied to windows and even roof shingles to make each window and each shingle a solar panel.

If they can perfect that and make it economical, and if there is a battery that effectively stores the extra energy for later use, it would revolutionize the electrical industry.

Sounds far fetched, but everyone told WIlbur and Orville Wright that they were nuts to try to fly, too.

That's a lot of "if's"  for that far fetched-ness.  Right now India is planning to build 455 coal powered electric generation plants to supply 340 million people who do not have electricty.  China also has about 400 plants left to build.  Maybe all those people can be told "if some stuff happens" with solar power coatings and batteries, you will have electricity because it sounded far fetched in the past for Wilbur and Orville Wright to try flying. 

[EVT1]

May 6, 2015 11:42:40 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

May 5, 2015 16:04:41 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

Solar will eventually work.  It might not be there yet, but it's getting cheaper and more efficient all the time.  Conversely fossil fuels get more and more expensive as we have to chase deposits that are harder and more expensive to access and process.

Technological advancements happen in all fields.  Like solar panels, fossil fuel efficiancy and extraction will also advance.  Not that long ago fracking was a plan for the future.  Now they're building natural gas power plants nationwide to take advantage of the abundance.  People will and are, buying  the most reliable and economical form of energy to satisfy their needs.  Right now solar panels are an intermittant and expensive source of energy versus fossil fuels.  Don't believe me ?  Just look at the size of the yearly global increase in fossil fuel usage.  Cheap and reliable. 

The sun is pretty much an unlimited power source and it isn't moving any further away.   

[Deleted]

May 6, 2015 11:51:59 GMT -5 ken a.k.a OMK said:

Batteries to store excess solar power are not the answer. Systems that send the excess power to the utility for credit then you pay to get power from them when your solar isn't producing is the efficient way to go.

We're in agreement.  It was my last sentence in reply #12 

[Deleted]

May 6, 2015 11:59:49 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

May 6, 2015 11:42:40 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Technological advancements happen in all fields.  Like solar panels, fossil fuel efficiancy and extraction will also advance.  Not that long ago fracking was a plan for the future.  Now they're building natural gas power plants nationwide to take advantage of the abundance.  People will and are, buying  the most reliable and economical form of energy to satisfy their needs.  Right now solar panels are an intermittant and expensive source of energy versus fossil fuels.  Don't believe me ?  Just look at the size of the yearly global increase in fossil fuel usage.  Cheap and reliable. 

The sun is pretty much an unlimited power source and it isn't moving any further away.   

It's also unrelated to the point I was making about tech advance, and the current level of battery capability.

[Politically_Incorrect12]

May 6, 2015 11:51:59 GMT -5 ken a.k.a OMK said:

Batteries to store excess solar power are not the answer. Systems that send the excess power to the utility for credit then you pay to get power from them when your solar isn't producing is the efficient way to go.

Like with solar roads?

Solar-powered roads: Coming to a highway near you?

CNN) -- As a kid growing up in the mid-1960s, Scott Brusaw would spend hours setting up miniature speedways on the living room carpet so that he could race his favorite slot cars up and down the electric tracks.

"I thought that if they made real roads electric, then us kids could drive," recalls Brusaw, who grew to become an electrical engineer. "That thought stuck with me my entire life."
 
Fast forward to mid-2000s, with the debate over global warming in full swing, Brusaw's wife Julie asked him whether he could build the electric roads he'd concocted as a child out of solar panels. Brusaw initially laughed off the idea -- but not for long.

With an airplane's black box in mind, the couple started mulling over the possibility of creating a solar powered super-strong case that could house sensitive electronics. They explored the idea of embedding solar cells to store energy inside the case, LEDs to illuminate the road lines and heating elements to resist ice and snow -- soon after, the concept of Solar Roadways was born.

The couple's proposal calls for the traditional petroleum-based asphalt highways to be replaced with a system of structurally-engineered solar panels. These would act as a massive energy generator that could feed the grid during daytime. They would also recharge electric vehicles while moving, thus helping to reduce greenhouse emissions drastically.

"Our original intent was to help solve the climate crisis," says Brusaw. "We learned that the U.S. had over 72,000 square kilometers of asphalt and concrete surfaces exposed to the sun. If we could cover them with our solar road panels, then we could produce over three times the amount of energy that we use as a nation -- that's using clean, renewable energy instead of coal."

The Idaho-based couple received their first government contract to work on the project in 2009, and have been working to perfect it ever since. Initially, they joined forces with researchers to develop a super-strong textured glass that would offer cars the traction they require. Then, they fitted LEDs road markers to avoid destroying the cells by painting highway lines over them and heating to warm the surface and keep the system working.

Read more at: www.cnn.com/2014/05/12/tech/solar-powered-roads-coming-highway/index.html

[happyhoix]

May 6, 2015 11:58:29 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

May 5, 2015 16:00:26 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

There is technology in the works for making an invisible coating that can be applied to windows and even roof shingles to make each window and each shingle a solar panel.

If they can perfect that and make it economical, and if there is a battery that effectively stores the extra energy for later use, it would revolutionize the electrical industry.

Sounds far fetched, but everyone told WIlbur and Orville Wright that they were nuts to try to fly, too.

That's a lot of "if's"  for that far fetched-ness.  Right now India is planning to build 455 coal powered electric generation plants to supply 340 million people who do not have electricty.  China also has about 400 plants left to build.  Maybe all those people can be told "if some stuff happens" with solar power coatings and batteries, you will have electricity because it sounded far fetched in the past for Wilbur and Orville Wright to try flying. 

No, China and India will build those plants because 1) they're the cheapest way to get electricity right now, and 2) the environmental regulations, at least in China (don't know about India) are laughable, so there is no regulatory reason why they wouldn't build them.

Twenty years from now, they will still be using that technology, but we will have discovered a cheap, environmentally friendly solar cell that will be gradually replacing those old power plants, just as cars once gradually replaced horses.  Hopefully, it will be the US who makes the discovery getting us over the next hurdle in solar technology, so that the US can cash in by selling everyone else our flashy solar technology.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Well, I finally pinned it down. A "powerwall" is 35 units.  This raises his projected price to $35,000, and thus cements this as yet another promise of a solution to a problem which doesn't exist: the need to "save the planet" from abundant, cheap, powerful so-called "fossil fuels".

The current types of energy processes that win out on a free market involve using naturally concentrated, stored, and plentiful raw energy materials such as coal/oil/gas (hydrocarbons aka fossil fuels) uranium/thorium (nuclear), and large concentrations of flowing water (hydro). The most efficient way to produce and distribute that energy is, when available, a centralized power plant with an electricity grid. That enables economies of scale to make every unit of electricity cheaper (and cleaner), and to give you as much or as little electricity as you want, on demand. It also renders it unnecessary to store most of the energy we use.

This is a good thing, as storing electricity is extremely expensive. This is largely why a Tesla car costs 80 grand or so even with the government forcing taxpayers to subsidize them $7-15K. When we use naturally stored fuels like oil or uranium, we don't have to pay those high prices--we only need storage for applications where you absolutely can't connect to a grid, such as carrying your iPhone around. And as we've seen with the iPhone and, more pronounced, with the Apple Watch, it's very easy to run out of battery power because it doesn't store much power for the money. And they lose their storage power over time. The best portable storage source we have is oil, and the reason oil prices are higher than coal or gas prices that that portability is so hard to achieve.

Elon Musk's announcement showed a very pretty battery that is no cheaper than existing batteries, though he dishonestly implied there was a price revolution. The coolest thing about the battery was that it seems to combine well with other batteries/Powerwalls of the same kind, which would allow you to scale a lot.

The alleged purpose of the Powerwall is to overcome the intermittency/unreliability problem of solar. But this is not a problem that needs to be overcome. If fossil fuels were problematic, we could use cheap nuclear to power all the grids in the world. Musk didn't even entertain that possibility. Go to Arizona and see how cheap their electricity is from one of the biggest nuclear plants in the world. (If you want to know how cheap nuclear could be, listen to my Power Hour with Rod Adams.)
But fossil fuels do not have some catastrophic flaw--they are overwhelmingly positive in their impacts (see: The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels). At the beginning of his presentation Musk glibly asserted that fossil fuels "suck"--even though they power his life and built his cars not to mention filing most of their batteries with electricity from gas or coal. To represent their impact he showed, not a world that is getting better than ever, but a seemingly ominous cloud of smoke that was actually steam. He chose not to show the deadly mining operations in China that are used to make the materials for solar panels, wind turbines, and his batteries. So much for objectivity.

[fairlycrazy23]

I didn't think most areas in the US got enough solar energy to allow houses to go off the grid entirely, even if you had a big battery for night.
I really don't think solar will ever be very practical as the only energy source for most houses. But big solar power plants may have a place in the grand scheme of power grid.

[Deleted]

May 6, 2015 15:50:39 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

May 6, 2015 11:58:29 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

That's a lot of "if's"  for that far fetched-ness.  Right now India is planning to build 455 coal powered electric generation plants to supply 340 million people who do not have electricity.  China also has about 400 plants left to build.  Maybe all those people can be told "if some stuff happens" with solar power coatings and batteries, you will have electricity because it sounded far fetched in the past for Wilbur and Orville Wright to try flying. 

No, China and India will build those plants because 1) they're the cheapest way to get electricity right now, and 2) the environmental regulations, at least in China (don't know about India) are laughable, so there is no regulatory reason why they wouldn't build them.

Twenty years from now, they will still be using that technology, but we will have discovered a cheap, environmentally friendly solar cell that will be gradually replacing those old power plants, just as cars once gradually replaced horses.  Hopefully, it will be the US who makes the discovery getting us over the next hurdle in solar technology, so that the US can cash in by selling everyone else our flashy solar technology.

Best to go back and read my reply #24 for some context on my answer. The US won't be cashing in on any new solar panel technology anytime soon. Even if we did come up with something better, China will produce a cheaper copy in short order through reverse engineering. They have lower production costs.