3 ms·

There isn't any reason for the author to bring up those points because they are irrelevant. This article is about whether it makes sense to buy a tesla battery

by hueving 12y ago

There isn't any reason for the author to bring up those points because they are irrelevant. This article is about whether it makes sense to buy a tesla battery right now. It doesn't matter if solar will be half the cost in five years. If that's the case, just buy it then when the numbers make sense. Let's say someone wrote an article reviewing a new apartment complex opening in the Tenderloin of SF. If they said that the crime there is terrible so people should look elsewhere, would you be complaining if they didn't provide in-depth projects of potential future crime rates in the same area?

justonepost 12y ago
It makes perfect sense to bring it up because the massive disruption this will cause to the global energy economy. Oil, coal, the structure of these are going to be altered massively. Think today how gas is used to blackmail the Ukraine and prop up autocratic political systems. There are very significant implications to all of this. By the time it becomes 'relevant' it will be ancient news to those who appreciate what's going on here.
- semi-extrinsic 12y ago
  The interesting question for solar power is not "When will stand-alone solar power be cheaper than coal/gas?". It is "How high can we push the fraction of solar power / total power before the power distribution grid fails?". You need base power generation to augment solar/wind, there's not a serious scientist in the world denying that, and the numbers I've heard quoted say you can't average much more than 50-60% solar and wind combined. Right now, Germany is charging ahead on solar. Their current peak record is 50.4% of total power from solar, on a sunny midsummer day with low power usage. Meanwhile, all of their neigbouring countries to the east are doing massive overhauls/reconfigurations of their power distribution grids just to be able to supply Germany with enough base power, mainly from nuclear.
  - ghshephard 12y ago
    The "We can't do everything with solar" was what everyone was saying (correctly) in 2005-2010. But, the entire point of the Powerwall product is that, today (not next year, today), in parts of Australia and Hawaii, it is now less expensive, and more efficient, to go 100% solar. As the prices of batteries drop, and solar becomes more efficient, the number of places where that is true will only increase. From the perspective of watching trends back in 2005, this wasn't supposed to happen until 2025, so it's arriving 10 years early. There's nothing that would prevent a good storage system + wind + power from supplying 100% of the power requirements reliably. You just need to scale your Storage system to handle the periods in which solar/wind aren't driving power. Regarding the Germany Scenario - Let's see how much nuclear they are going to require after they add a few Terrawatt-Hours worth of battery storage to their grid. Finally, commenting on your "so Serious Scientists" - there are a lot of them that have done the calculations and have come to the conclusion that only a solar solution will supply the world with the power it requires so that everyone can have an first-world lifestlye. In particular, check out Nate Lewis's introduction to Solar Energy - https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=385384449#ls=1 https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodca... ,He "provides a beginner's overview of the concepts behind solar energy generation as well as the current state of the art and its potential role in future energy production." It's eye opening - even nuclear power plants don't stand a chance versus solar (which, to be honest, is just harvesting the output of a really, really, really big fusion generator) The missing component has always been storage, and Elon has jumpstarted that conversation. The powerall is interesting, the gigafactory is more interesting, but the fact that he realizes Tesla is only going to be a tiny, tiny element of a much larger industrial transition, is, in my mind, the most important part of this story.
    - Someone 12y ago
      "There's nothing that would prevent a good storage system + wind + power from supplying 100% of the power requirements reliably. You just need to scale your Storage system to handle the periods in which solar/wind aren't driving power." Nothing, except for costs. Those are going down and are becoming competitive for many parts of the world, but costs will be prohibitive for some climates for quite a while. For example, if you have lots of snow and strong winds in winter, you may need to have _weeks_ of power storage to get reliable power. Keeping a grid connection for those cases will help, but if lots of people do this, the price of power in those peak periods may surge a lot as your electricity supplier will have to recoup the costs of keeping its plant on standby year round in a few weeks. That seems fixable by connecting solar/wind systems over large distances, but we have to work on getting a grid that is fed by thousands of suppliers and in which the direction power flows can vary more. But yes, I think solar and wind are the future and even the near future, even in the less sunny parts of the world.
ghshephard 12y ago
If everyone took that attitude, Solar would have never have advanced. It's a combination of first-adopters, and strong government support that's gotten us where we are today. I'm not opposed to a writer talking about the practical facts today - I encourage it. But, unless you are a paid advocate of the Koch brothers, you are somewhat obliged to balance out such an article with some context in how far we've gone and are likely to go. Taking your example - Oakland near Lake Merrit in 17th has some significant crime, but any writer worth their salt taking about it, would compare it to when I lived there, back in 1996-1998, to discuss how far it has come in the last 20 years, and what the general trend is.
SixSigma 12y ago
If there was massive investment in police and other anti crime initiatives, now would be the right time to buy, by not providing analysis the might be trying to hide those facts for the benefits of others. Ration decisions rely on perfect knowledge.

by hueving 12y ago

justonepost 12y ago

It makes perfect sense to bring it up because the massive disruption this will cause to the global energy economy. Oil, coal, the structure of these are going to be altered massively. Think today how gas is used to blackmail the Ukraine and prop up autocratic political systems. There are very significant implications to all of this. By the time it becomes 'relevant' it will be ancient news to those who appreciate what's going on here.

semi-extrinsic 12y ago
The interesting question for solar power is not "When will stand-alone solar power be cheaper than coal/gas?". It is "How high can we push the fraction of solar power / total power before the power distribution grid fails?". You need base power generation to augment solar/wind, there's not a serious scientist in the world denying that, and the numbers I've heard quoted say you can't average much more than 50-60% solar and wind combined. Right now, Germany is charging ahead on solar. Their current peak record is 50.4% of total power from solar, on a sunny midsummer day with low power usage. Meanwhile, all of their neigbouring countries to the east are doing massive overhauls/reconfigurations of their power distribution grids just to be able to supply Germany with enough base power, mainly from nuclear.
- ghshephard 12y ago
  The "We can't do everything with solar" was what everyone was saying (correctly) in 2005-2010. But, the entire point of the Powerwall product is that, today (not next year, today), in parts of Australia and Hawaii, it is now less expensive, and more efficient, to go 100% solar. As the prices of batteries drop, and solar becomes more efficient, the number of places where that is true will only increase. From the perspective of watching trends back in 2005, this wasn't supposed to happen until 2025, so it's arriving 10 years early. There's nothing that would prevent a good storage system + wind + power from supplying 100% of the power requirements reliably. You just need to scale your Storage system to handle the periods in which solar/wind aren't driving power. Regarding the Germany Scenario - Let's see how much nuclear they are going to require after they add a few Terrawatt-Hours worth of battery storage to their grid. Finally, commenting on your "so Serious Scientists" - there are a lot of them that have done the calculations and have come to the conclusion that only a solar solution will supply the world with the power it requires so that everyone can have an first-world lifestlye. In particular, check out Nate Lewis's introduction to Solar Energy - https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=385384449#ls=1 https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodca... ,He "provides a beginner's overview of the concepts behind solar energy generation as well as the current state of the art and its potential role in future energy production." It's eye opening - even nuclear power plants don't stand a chance versus solar (which, to be honest, is just harvesting the output of a really, really, really big fusion generator) The missing component has always been storage, and Elon has jumpstarted that conversation. The powerall is interesting, the gigafactory is more interesting, but the fact that he realizes Tesla is only going to be a tiny, tiny element of a much larger industrial transition, is, in my mind, the most important part of this story.
  - Someone 12y ago
    "There's nothing that would prevent a good storage system + wind + power from supplying 100% of the power requirements reliably. You just need to scale your Storage system to handle the periods in which solar/wind aren't driving power." Nothing, except for costs. Those are going down and are becoming competitive for many parts of the world, but costs will be prohibitive for some climates for quite a while. For example, if you have lots of snow and strong winds in winter, you may need to have _weeks_ of power storage to get reliable power. Keeping a grid connection for those cases will help, but if lots of people do this, the price of power in those peak periods may surge a lot as your electricity supplier will have to recoup the costs of keeping its plant on standby year round in a few weeks. That seems fixable by connecting solar/wind systems over large distances, but we have to work on getting a grid that is fed by thousands of suppliers and in which the direction power flows can vary more. But yes, I think solar and wind are the future and even the near future, even in the less sunny parts of the world.

ghshephard 12y ago

If everyone took that attitude, Solar would have never have advanced. It's a combination of first-adopters, and strong government support that's gotten us where we are today. I'm not opposed to a writer talking about the practical facts today - I encourage it. But, unless you are a paid advocate of the Koch brothers, you are somewhat obliged to balance out such an article with some context in how far we've gone and are likely to go. Taking your example - Oakland near Lake Merrit in 17th has some significant crime, but any writer worth their salt taking about it, would compare it to when I lived there, back in 1996-1998, to discuss how far it has come in the last 20 years, and what the general trend is.

SixSigma 12y ago

If there was massive investment in police and other anti crime initiatives, now would be the right time to buy, by not providing analysis the might be trying to hide those facts for the benefits of others. Ration decisions rely on perfect knowledge.