6 ms·

> Transforming an F-150 Lightning into a backup generator means you can keep the lights on during blackouts. > ... 9.6 kilowatts of carbon-free electricity gene

• jylam 4y ago
  Isn't a battery a type of generator, to be pedantic ? There is not electricity stored in a battery, just a chemical state that happens to generate electricity.
  • paskozdilar 4y ago
    While that is true from the perspective of electrical engineering, I think it is reasonable to expect that "generator" colloquially refers to an engine that converts fuel into electricity. Since you can't really "pour fuel" into a battery (at least that I know of), I personally wouldn't call it a "generator".
    • Gigachad 4y ago
      The most charitable interpretation is that “generator” just refers to something that keeps your house powered when the grid goes down. It serves exactly the same purpose to the end user as a real generator so it doesn’t really matter what happens behind the scenes. And that it’s carbon free because in theory it could be charged by purely renewables, especially likely if you have personal solar, vs a real generator which is only burning fuel.
    • greggsy 4y ago
      It’s just a clever use of the term for editorial value. I think it works at communicating the use case in the article. No need to ver analyse it.
    • DarylZero 4y ago
      Fuel cells are batteries that you pour fuel into.
  • 2000UltraDeluxe 4y ago
    Energy converter, if you want to be pedantic. For practical purposes it's storage.
• marcinzm 4y ago
  >I predict grid-tying will not look like a virtue when the public utility decides to tap into the owner’s battery to make up for generation malinvestment... Then limit or block exporting out to the grid.
  • more_corn 4y ago
    You need this anyway for safety.
    • no-s 4y ago
      Also, safety will probably also dictate you must wait for the utility to finish using your truck battery before you disconnect it. You’ll probably have to request a disconnect and wait for generation or OtherPeoplesStorage to come online…
• greggsy 4y ago
  It’s true that a generator converts motive energy into electricity, but in the context of a worksite, or a household, it fulfils the same outcome. The article is being clever and recontextualising the concept, because that’s what cements a use case in peoples minds.
  • no-s 4y ago
    > The article is being clever and recontextualising the concept, because that’s what cements a use case in peoples minds. Awesome! Gotta remember that line when I make shit up! Hurrah for This brave new world where a sufficiently recontextualised concept reveals a whole new consensually derived factual basis for persuasion.
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
• pengaru 4y ago
  > I predict grid-tying will not look like a virtue when the public utility decides to tap into the owner’s battery to make up for generation malinvestment It sure looks like a virtue when the public utility already taps into grid-tied rooftop PV arrays, generating income for homeowners and cleaning up the grid. If adding energy storage to homes allows the grid to require less fossil-fuel burning peaker plants, while generating income for those homeowners, why wouldn't this be rightfully seen as a virtue? My main concern is that the compensation be appropriate for the added wear and tear on the grid-tied EV batteries. Assuming this is addressed, it seems like a good thing.
  • no-s 4y ago
    > If adding energy storage to homes allows the grid to require less fossil-fuel burning peaker plants, while generating income for those homeowners, why wouldn't this be rightfully seen as a virtue? Hmm, imagine the scenario where the truck owner inconveniently runs out of battery charge on the highway because the utility depleted it in favor of increasing generation. While all of your scenarios may seem virtuous to you, it’s not necessarily incorporating the perspective of the person who actually paid $1000s for the privilege of being left on the side of the road… To me it feels like a bummer. Not to you?
    • pengaru 4y ago
      I don't really understand where you're coming from here. In the hypothetical situation you describe where the person is exclusively relying on this grid-tied vehicle for all their transportation needs as well, I'm inclined to say they made a poor choice. A lot of Americans have multiple vehicles, it's those I expect to most exploit this option. Driving a giant pickup truck for all your needs isn't particularly pleasant, it's kind of an ideal vehicle to leave grid-tied most the time until you need to haul something big/heavy/filthy.
      • no-s 4y ago
        It’s not hypothetical that a person would buy a pickup truck and expect to use it at all, heheh. You chose to reframe it as “the person is exclusively relying on this grid-tied vehicle for all their transportation needs as well”, which is framing an argument I did not make. I think that’s some kind of rhetorical fallacy on your part. Please help me to recontextualize such an inane counter. It’s like you have no response at all and just reframe things so you’ll have something to refute. That’s dishearteningly dishonest for HN.
• 0daystock 4y ago
  I wonder why you're being downvoted, because what you say is quite true. Recently, I declined purchasing a solar system for my home, because it would not provide energy independence when the grid is down as I had envisioned. Instead, it required a device from the power company which would "allow" me to use my own energy storage, but also give them full access to the same resources. I saw this for the obvious scam it was - power companies sharing the burden of costly infrastructure with consumers through clever marketing and federal tax "discounts". It's not a stretch of imagination to apply this logic to other independent energy mechanisms like gasoline engine cars and imagine the implications on our autonomy.