4 ms·

Just like a car load of hard disks driven 2000 miles has greater bandwidth than transmitting that same data over the internet, I wonder if you could arbitrage T

Just like a car load of hard disks driven 2000 miles has greater bandwidth than transmitting that same data over the internet, I wonder if you could arbitrage Texas electric costs by driving a semi-truck full of Tesla Powerwall batteries from Florida.

apexalpha 6y ago
Congratz, you just invented the possibly least energy efficient way to construct interconnected grids. But in all seriousness, this is why the entire world interconnects their grids as much as possible: arbitraging energy needs (/ cost).
- dmurray 6y ago
  It's much more energy-efficient than building pylons and distribution lines, if you only need it once in a lifetime to deal with a hundred-year weather event, and outside that you have a use for the Powerwalls and the truck. It's not implausible something like this could be economically worthwhile, though as sokoloff points out it's not close to being there at current prices. Trucks full of portable generators and diesel fuel are also a potential competitor.
  - archi42 6y ago
    "if you only need it once in a lifetime to deal with a hundred-year weather event" - I have two problems with that: 1. IIUC global warming means events like this become more likely. So for our parent generations this might be a once a lifetime event, but for us and future generations that thinking could be dangerously wrong. 2. You're seeming to assume the only reason for an interconnected grid might be cold weather (at least that's what you're implying). I believe additional resilience and a more open market are also benefits.
    - dmurray 6y ago
      I'm not arguing that Texas having an interconnector to the other US grids would be bad. I don't have the expertise on climate, power distribution or future energy need projections to have a strong opinion on that - though I can see it would have certain benefits. Just saying that it's fallacious to argue that relying on an emergency solution instead of improved infrastructure to handle extreme cases is per se more expensive, without considering how often the extreme cases are hit.
  - apexalpha 6y ago
    People keep saying that this is somehow a "once in a lifetime" event in Texas, even though the last one was in 2011. Plus, being interconnected gives you the opportunity not just to prevent grid failure, but to sell and buy electricity to arbitrage the price, which will be increasingly important in the future due to renewable energy intermittency.
sokoloff 6y ago
Loaded 3 wide, 2 high, 90 deep for space constraints, you'd be well over the gross weight limit. Loaded to the weight limit, you can ballpark 48K pounds or 174 Powerwall 2s. Those would hold just under 2.5MWh, or just over $2K of electricity at $900/MWh. If you figure the truck costs you $1.50/mile on the low side, it would cost you at least $1500 to drive Pensacola to Houston and back. Probably not a retirement plan to (Power)bank on.
harg 6y ago
You’d probably be better bringing a diesel generator and a big tank of fuel. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if that isn’t being done by the authorities to help make up the shortfall

apexalpha 6y ago

Congratz, you just invented the possibly least energy efficient way to construct interconnected grids. But in all seriousness, this is why the entire world interconnects their grids as much as possible: arbitraging energy needs (/ cost).

dmurray 6y ago
It's much more energy-efficient than building pylons and distribution lines, if you only need it once in a lifetime to deal with a hundred-year weather event, and outside that you have a use for the Powerwalls and the truck. It's not implausible something like this could be economically worthwhile, though as sokoloff points out it's not close to being there at current prices. Trucks full of portable generators and diesel fuel are also a potential competitor.
- archi42 6y ago
  "if you only need it once in a lifetime to deal with a hundred-year weather event" - I have two problems with that: 1. IIUC global warming means events like this become more likely. So for our parent generations this might be a once a lifetime event, but for us and future generations that thinking could be dangerously wrong. 2. You're seeming to assume the only reason for an interconnected grid might be cold weather (at least that's what you're implying). I believe additional resilience and a more open market are also benefits.
  - dmurray 6y ago
    I'm not arguing that Texas having an interconnector to the other US grids would be bad. I don't have the expertise on climate, power distribution or future energy need projections to have a strong opinion on that - though I can see it would have certain benefits. Just saying that it's fallacious to argue that relying on an emergency solution instead of improved infrastructure to handle extreme cases is per se more expensive, without considering how often the extreme cases are hit.
- apexalpha 6y ago
  People keep saying that this is somehow a "once in a lifetime" event in Texas, even though the last one was in 2011. Plus, being interconnected gives you the opportunity not just to prevent grid failure, but to sell and buy electricity to arbitrage the price, which will be increasingly important in the future due to renewable energy intermittency.

sokoloff 6y ago

Loaded 3 wide, 2 high, 90 deep for space constraints, you'd be well over the gross weight limit. Loaded to the weight limit, you can ballpark 48K pounds or 174 Powerwall 2s. Those would hold just under 2.5MWh, or just over $2K of electricity at $900/MWh. If you figure the truck costs you $1.50/mile on the low side, it would cost you at least $1500 to drive Pensacola to Houston and back. Probably not a retirement plan to (Power)bank on.

harg 6y ago

You’d probably be better bringing a diesel generator and a big tank of fuel. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if that isn’t being done by the authorities to help make up the shortfall