7 ms·

The long term question here is will solar be distributed or centralized? I think the answer is distributed like the model Elon and solar city are using. It just

The long term question here is will solar be distributed or centralized? I think the answer is distributed like the model Elon and solar city are using. It just doesn't makes sense for the old power companies like Buffet's NV Energy to maintain all the transmission lines when the cost of batteries falls.

fweespeech 11y ago
Well, I think it really depends on the economics of grid storage and proximity. For instance, there was someone saying they pay $.10/kwh year round on a thread the other day and it was due to their proximity to grid storage. $.10 to .15/kwh is realistically the range battery technology will be in for the next 10-15 years, barring a major technological change. That simply is not going to be cost effective in many areas. EDIT: Since I can't post... http://www.computerworld.com/article/2977655/sustainable-it/as-energy-push-accelerates-battery-costs-set-to-plunge-60.html http://www.computerworld.com/article/2977655/sustainable-it/... > As energy push accelerates, battery costs set to plunge 60% > Lithium-ion (Li-on) batteries will drop from $550 per kilowatt hour (kWh) in 2014 to $200 per kWh by 2020; and flow battery prices will drop from $680 per kWh to $350 per kWh during the same time. A daily cycle, 5 year battery is still going to be ~$.11/kwh in 2020. You need generation + battery storage [combined] to get into the below $.15/kwh for it to make sense outside of peak June-Sept, 2-7pm times.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  > $.10 to .15/kwh is realistically the range battery technology will be in for the next 10-15 years Forgive the lack of citation, but Goldman Sachs just put out a report on Tesla within the last few days, and they're estimating the cost of batteries dropping ~60% over 5 years due to the Gigafactory producing 35GW of storage each year. EDIT: Found it, http://evannex.com/blogs/news/75718469-goldman-sachs-bullish-on-electric-vehicles-tesla-gigafactory-leading-the-charge http://evannex.com/blogs/news/75718469-goldman-sachs-bullish... "Discussing electric vehicle batteries, Goldman reports that: "technological advances play a significant role, growing economies of scale are the key driver of cost reductions. Led by Tesla and Panasonic’s 35GW Gigafactory, battery manufacturers have committed to approximately triple current production capacity over the next five years [Exhibit 36].... Autos analysts forecast the battery range for lower performance EVs to increase by over 70%, while battery costs are expected to fall by more than 60% over the next five years [Exhibit 37].""
- epistasis 11y ago
  Solid pricing information for large quantities of batteries is hard to get, but GM recently disclosed their price to be $145/kWh, and apparently LG Chem's other customers are paying around ~$100 more/kWh [1]. Is your $0.11/kWh price just for the stored amount at $200/kWh? That conversion factor to kWh-stored prices is more favorable than I've been using, as I've been assuming about ~1000 cycles worth of storage, but then I don't really have a good number for that. Since not all energy will need to be stored, and much (most?) can be used right away, then it will increase the overall cost of energy only by the X% that needs to be stored. So if solar is $0.05/kWh, and 50% can be used right away, then the overall cost for solar + storage would be $0.105/kWh on the generation side. Which is quite competitive already. http://insideevs.com/lg-chem-ticked-gm-disclosing-145kwh-battery-cell-pricing-video/ http://insideevs.com/lg-chem-ticked-gm-disclosing-145kwh-bat...
  - fweespeech 11y ago
    > Is your $0.11/kWh price just for the stored amount at $200/kWh? That conversion factor to kWh-stored prices is more favorable than I've been using, as I've been assuming about ~1000 cycles worth of storage, but then I don't really have a good number for that. Yeah. I don't really have good numbers but Powerwalls have a 10 year guarantee iirc and many batteries have a 5 year guarantee so I was using a higher number. > Solid pricing information for large quantities of batteries is hard to get, but GM recently disclosed their price to be $145/kWh, and apparently LG Chem's other customers are paying around ~$100 more/kWh [1]. GM isn't selling it to consumers at $200/kwh but is buying them from LG Chem and its a deal for far larger production runs. GM is going to get a much better deal than you or I [who will only buy a single bank of batteries every 5 years].
    - epistasis 11y ago
      I just read that the Tesla Powerwall has a warranty to 5,000 cycles [1], which is 5x what I thought it would be. Without installation costs, that's $0.095/kWh == $3000 / (7kWh * 5000 cycles * 0.9 efficiency). Which means that consumer storage is already within your $0.11/kWh price; that's completely astounding to me, and means that on the grid scale it will be even cheaper.... I imagine that the days of peaker plants are coming to a close entirely. This conversation has made me hugely optimistic. Huge swathes of the country are already primed to go completely off grid, economically, then. If solar costs $0.06/kWh, and half of the energy is stored at $0.10/kWh, that's a total price of $0.11/kWh for an off-grid site. That's far cheaper than what I pay for electricity right now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Powerwall#cite_note-2015ecP4-9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Powerwall#cite_note-2015...
jonknee 11y ago
I think there will be both. In dense areas there is more electricity demand than available space for panels. There are also lots of very sunny areas without any people in the way.
Gravityloss 11y ago
Couldn't one argue exactly the opposite? Since, due to physics, electricity is very hard to store and there are already transmission lines, why not use them? There are going to be factories that probably can't realistically be supported by batteries. Another alternative is to run only in the summer and on sunny days. Or to do all heavy industry/manufacturing close to hydro, nuclear or geothermal power sources. In a sense, it would be a return towards the old mill brook economy. They recently opened a big subsea transmission cable between Netherlands and Norway. Norway has mountains for hydro load balancing while Netherlands has wind turbines for volatile production.
- maxerickson 11y ago
  The factory nearby here (a paper mill) has a larger power plant than the ~35,000 people that live in the area. They aren't going to switch to something less reliable than the natural gas line feeding the plant, nor are they going to switch to something more expensive. It typically only shuts down for several weeks a year and isn't all that profitable (at least, the owners keep going bankrupt, 4 or 5 times in the recent 20 years), I doubt running less would help.
  - Gravityloss 11y ago
    Paper has become a worse and worse business since electronic media has taken over gradually. But the "turn factories off" was a bit of a joke. Though Nordpool does have its spikes and it indeed makes sense to sometimes turn off factories. Depends on your process. Nowadays they run data centers in some old paper factories here (since the electricity is cheap). So in a sense the old industries are gone, from lack of demand, and new industries have gone where there is cheap power available.
    - maxerickson 11y ago
      The thought was that industry doesn't necessarily care about the grid, it just treats it as an option and calculates whether it is a good one. (hence pointing out that it was the largest energy consumer in the area and had already opted out of buying grid power, that it's not in a great industry strengthens the point)
sremani 11y ago
Long term, it will be distributed but Utilities are fighting their fight. They want to collect rent on transmission lines, so we are not too far away where Solar customers would have accept that they have to pay say $50 fee for connecting to grid etc. That may help the utilities medium term, but if wall-mounts become economical, we may truly see off-grid take off.
Eridrus 11y ago
There would need to be a massive oversupply of energy to make a distributed model work since you can't share the excess you have or get extra when you need it. I don't think people would be happy moving to a battery-only model where if their power usage spiked they were SOL until they installed more solar. And that's assuming everyone has the space to install enough solar; residential high rises certainly wouldn't be able to power themselves unless they coated their sides with solar panels, and that may not even work in dense neighborhoods. Unless the whole solar + battery kit was significantly cheaper than grid solar, not just on a per watt basis, but with all the overcapacity you need for fluctuations to not be brutal, I doubt the predominant model will be distributed.
grondilu 11y ago
Isn't solar power more efficient when concentrated? That should favor centralized solutions, shouldn't it?
- epistasis 11y ago
  What type of efficiency are you talking about? For kWh/$ efficiency, non-concentrated flat-panel solar is the most efficient. Concentrated solar power in practice is usually thermally based, heating up something and then generating electricity from that. It's more expensive, but also is a form of storage, so depending on the use case it may be cheaper over all, but that's highly dependent on the situation.
prostoalex 11y ago
Distributed to what level - block, township, city, county, state? SCTY and others are already experimenting with "community storage" http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Lesson-Learned-From-SolarCitys-First-Home-Energy-Storage-Installs http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Lesson-Learned-F...
rwj 11y ago
As you seem imply, the trade-off here is between the costs of distribution and economies of scale. However, without numbers for the various costs, I don't see how you can make a prediction.
erikb 11y ago
The panels themself will be decentralized but I believe that every business will be centralized once it's profitable in itself and in widespread use. E.g. the gas in the car is yours, but the gas station is a global huge giant that has more control over gas than you.

fweespeech 11y ago

Well, I think it really depends on the economics of grid storage and proximity. For instance, there was someone saying they pay $.10/kwh year round on a thread the other day and it was due to their proximity to grid storage. $.10 to .15/kwh is realistically the range battery technology will be in for the next 10-15 years, barring a major technological change. That simply is not going to be cost effective in many areas. EDIT: Since I can't post... http://www.computerworld.com/article/2977655/sustainable-it/as-energy-push-accelerates-battery-costs-set-to-plunge-60.html http://www.computerworld.com/article/2977655/sustainable-it/... > As energy push accelerates, battery costs set to plunge 60% > Lithium-ion (Li-on) batteries will drop from $550 per kilowatt hour (kWh) in 2014 to $200 per kWh by 2020; and flow battery prices will drop from $680 per kWh to $350 per kWh during the same time. A daily cycle, 5 year battery is still going to be ~$.11/kwh in 2020. You need generation + battery storage [combined] to get into the below $.15/kwh for it to make sense outside of peak June-Sept, 2-7pm times.

toomuchtodo 11y ago
> $.10 to .15/kwh is realistically the range battery technology will be in for the next 10-15 years Forgive the lack of citation, but Goldman Sachs just put out a report on Tesla within the last few days, and they're estimating the cost of batteries dropping ~60% over 5 years due to the Gigafactory producing 35GW of storage each year. EDIT: Found it, http://evannex.com/blogs/news/75718469-goldman-sachs-bullish-on-electric-vehicles-tesla-gigafactory-leading-the-charge http://evannex.com/blogs/news/75718469-goldman-sachs-bullish... "Discussing electric vehicle batteries, Goldman reports that: "technological advances play a significant role, growing economies of scale are the key driver of cost reductions. Led by Tesla and Panasonic’s 35GW Gigafactory, battery manufacturers have committed to approximately triple current production capacity over the next five years [Exhibit 36].... Autos analysts forecast the battery range for lower performance EVs to increase by over 70%, while battery costs are expected to fall by more than 60% over the next five years [Exhibit 37].""
epistasis 11y ago
Solid pricing information for large quantities of batteries is hard to get, but GM recently disclosed their price to be $145/kWh, and apparently LG Chem's other customers are paying around ~$100 more/kWh [1]. Is your $0.11/kWh price just for the stored amount at $200/kWh? That conversion factor to kWh-stored prices is more favorable than I've been using, as I've been assuming about ~1000 cycles worth of storage, but then I don't really have a good number for that. Since not all energy will need to be stored, and much (most?) can be used right away, then it will increase the overall cost of energy only by the X% that needs to be stored. So if solar is $0.05/kWh, and 50% can be used right away, then the overall cost for solar + storage would be $0.105/kWh on the generation side. Which is quite competitive already. http://insideevs.com/lg-chem-ticked-gm-disclosing-145kwh-battery-cell-pricing-video/ http://insideevs.com/lg-chem-ticked-gm-disclosing-145kwh-bat...
- fweespeech 11y ago
  > Is your $0.11/kWh price just for the stored amount at $200/kWh? That conversion factor to kWh-stored prices is more favorable than I've been using, as I've been assuming about ~1000 cycles worth of storage, but then I don't really have a good number for that. Yeah. I don't really have good numbers but Powerwalls have a 10 year guarantee iirc and many batteries have a 5 year guarantee so I was using a higher number. > Solid pricing information for large quantities of batteries is hard to get, but GM recently disclosed their price to be $145/kWh, and apparently LG Chem's other customers are paying around ~$100 more/kWh [1]. GM isn't selling it to consumers at $200/kwh but is buying them from LG Chem and its a deal for far larger production runs. GM is going to get a much better deal than you or I [who will only buy a single bank of batteries every 5 years].
  - epistasis 11y ago
    I just read that the Tesla Powerwall has a warranty to 5,000 cycles [1], which is 5x what I thought it would be. Without installation costs, that's $0.095/kWh == $3000 / (7kWh * 5000 cycles * 0.9 efficiency). Which means that consumer storage is already within your $0.11/kWh price; that's completely astounding to me, and means that on the grid scale it will be even cheaper.... I imagine that the days of peaker plants are coming to a close entirely. This conversation has made me hugely optimistic. Huge swathes of the country are already primed to go completely off grid, economically, then. If solar costs $0.06/kWh, and half of the energy is stored at $0.10/kWh, that's a total price of $0.11/kWh for an off-grid site. That's far cheaper than what I pay for electricity right now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Powerwall#cite_note-2015ecP4-9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Powerwall#cite_note-2015...

jonknee 11y ago

I think there will be both. In dense areas there is more electricity demand than available space for panels. There are also lots of very sunny areas without any people in the way.

Gravityloss 11y ago

Couldn't one argue exactly the opposite? Since, due to physics, electricity is very hard to store and there are already transmission lines, why not use them? There are going to be factories that probably can't realistically be supported by batteries. Another alternative is to run only in the summer and on sunny days. Or to do all heavy industry/manufacturing close to hydro, nuclear or geothermal power sources. In a sense, it would be a return towards the old mill brook economy. They recently opened a big subsea transmission cable between Netherlands and Norway. Norway has mountains for hydro load balancing while Netherlands has wind turbines for volatile production.

maxerickson 11y ago
The factory nearby here (a paper mill) has a larger power plant than the ~35,000 people that live in the area. They aren't going to switch to something less reliable than the natural gas line feeding the plant, nor are they going to switch to something more expensive. It typically only shuts down for several weeks a year and isn't all that profitable (at least, the owners keep going bankrupt, 4 or 5 times in the recent 20 years), I doubt running less would help.
- Gravityloss 11y ago
  Paper has become a worse and worse business since electronic media has taken over gradually. But the "turn factories off" was a bit of a joke. Though Nordpool does have its spikes and it indeed makes sense to sometimes turn off factories. Depends on your process. Nowadays they run data centers in some old paper factories here (since the electricity is cheap). So in a sense the old industries are gone, from lack of demand, and new industries have gone where there is cheap power available.
  - maxerickson 11y ago
    The thought was that industry doesn't necessarily care about the grid, it just treats it as an option and calculates whether it is a good one. (hence pointing out that it was the largest energy consumer in the area and had already opted out of buying grid power, that it's not in a great industry strengthens the point)

sremani 11y ago

Long term, it will be distributed but Utilities are fighting their fight. They want to collect rent on transmission lines, so we are not too far away where Solar customers would have accept that they have to pay say $50 fee for connecting to grid etc. That may help the utilities medium term, but if wall-mounts become economical, we may truly see off-grid take off.

Eridrus 11y ago

There would need to be a massive oversupply of energy to make a distributed model work since you can't share the excess you have or get extra when you need it. I don't think people would be happy moving to a battery-only model where if their power usage spiked they were SOL until they installed more solar. And that's assuming everyone has the space to install enough solar; residential high rises certainly wouldn't be able to power themselves unless they coated their sides with solar panels, and that may not even work in dense neighborhoods. Unless the whole solar + battery kit was significantly cheaper than grid solar, not just on a per watt basis, but with all the overcapacity you need for fluctuations to not be brutal, I doubt the predominant model will be distributed.

grondilu 11y ago

Isn't solar power more efficient when concentrated? That should favor centralized solutions, shouldn't it?

epistasis 11y ago
What type of efficiency are you talking about? For kWh/$ efficiency, non-concentrated flat-panel solar is the most efficient. Concentrated solar power in practice is usually thermally based, heating up something and then generating electricity from that. It's more expensive, but also is a form of storage, so depending on the use case it may be cheaper over all, but that's highly dependent on the situation.

prostoalex 11y ago

Distributed to what level - block, township, city, county, state? SCTY and others are already experimenting with "community storage" http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Lesson-Learned-From-SolarCitys-First-Home-Energy-Storage-Installs http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Lesson-Learned-F...

rwj 11y ago

As you seem imply, the trade-off here is between the costs of distribution and economies of scale. However, without numbers for the various costs, I don't see how you can make a prediction.

erikb 11y ago

The panels themself will be decentralized but I believe that every business will be centralized once it's profitable in itself and in widespread use. E.g. the gas in the car is yours, but the gas station is a global huge giant that has more control over gas than you.