How Tesla could pull more consumers off the grid

What would make a big difference would be if they allowed 2 way energy transfer to/from the car so that the car could act as a home battery when connected.

doctorwho said:

What would make a big difference would be if they allowed 2 way energy transfer to/from the car so that the car could act as a home battery when connected.

Click to expand...

extra charge cycles on the pack which you don't want

"Charge cycle" is a "statistical" measure of battery wear and as every other statistics it is only true in very general sense. In every particular case it is just wrong.
"Charge cycle" does not mean a thing as batteries don't have an internal counter of charge cycles. What counts are battery temp, battery SOC, battery current. And age.

You can kill a battery in one charge cycle. And you can have a very good battery after 5.000 "cycles".

meloccom said:

Fascinating story about how much of a game changer the Gigafactory will be on the Reneweconomy website.
How Tesla could pull more consumers off the grid
Quote "In the US, Morgan Stanley says there may be a “tipping point” that causes customers to seek an off-grid approach."
If Tesla start selling stationary batteries in volume that tipping point will happen quickly.

Click to expand...

We'll reach the tipping point in Australia way before the US due to our higher electricity charges. I wonder if Tesla has considered using us as an experiment?

any household drain on the battery would be at a relatively low rate compared to everyday car use (unless you are using an electric welder) and generate little heat. In any case there are pros and cons of every option

A contrarian view...from an efficiency and environmental point of view I think the last thing we want to do is get off the grid. We should view the grid as a battery - and put our collective effort into making the total energy system green.

I think the figures are something along the lines that the average cost of power is around 8c/kwh - the rest of the cost is management and distribution. The real cost of batteries will exceed the cost of the grid for some time to come - but as this comes down other mass storage systems should become cheaper. See:

https://theconversation.com/pumped-hydro-energy-storage-making-better-use-of-wind-18565

In any case we should be keen to feed into the system so we can replace dirty production. Whilst we may hate power companies opting out will only exacerbate environmental problems.

Cheers
David

There's a disincentive to sty on grid when power companies will buy your own generated power and then sell the equivalent power back to you at double the price. It's a clear price signal that they want to drive houses with PV panels off the grid.

True, but there is a distribution cost - its a bit like a phone call. A phone call costs nothing but the cost of the network cost has to be recovered. This can be a fixed monthly cost, per call or per second - the Telco's charge what they think will attract customers but they still have to cover the network costs.

For the foreseeable future there will always be a distribution network. The cost of this SHOULD be less than the real cost of batteries so it should be a simple equation. Yes the buyback cost reflects the real cost of power but this should be seen as realistic - not punitive. Just economics.

However, if more and more exit the grid the costs will be more thinly spread. That means that the remaining users of the grid will have to pay a larger share of the costs. These will be businesses that employ us and businesses that we buy from.

If an companies costs go up then they may not be competitive and will reduce production or move off shore. As an Australian company that exports this is something that I am well aware of....

From a cost of living perspective the costs of purchases will increase to include a businesses increased share of the network costs so, even if you are off the grid, you will still be paying. For instance the local bakery electricity costs will increase and this will be recovered in increased costs for bread.

My proposition is that the answer is not a simple 'get me off the grid' but what is the most efficient/renewable way of powering Australia?

Cheers
David

- - - Updated - - -

BTW - the power feed-in tariff should reflect the real cost of what the distribution companies pay for power on a per hour basis. Something that is easy to do using smart meters.

The most efficient way of powering Australia is always going to come from improving energy efficiency and reducing the need for power. in the same way a Tesla will always be the second best car, the best car option will always be 'no car', not a viable option for most Australians though.

Agreed - I am hopeful that the cost equation is changing quickly enough to change the economics.

The costs of renewable power are coming down quickly - I hope the financial managers/bankers will ensure that money is not invested in stranded assets but they always take time to update their models and thinking.

I am interested in what is happening in Queensland's Galilee Basin with the new Coal mine approvals - I can't see how this investment could be viable. From a pollution perspective I guess it may be positive IF it replaces dirtier coal....

Investment in coal mining will become stranded - I have sold my shares in companies with coal mining assets.

Cheers
David

Higgy said:

I am interested in what is happening in Queensland's Galilee Basin with the new Coal mine approvals - I can't see how this investment could be viable. From a pollution perspective I guess it may be positive IF it replaces dirtier coal....

Investment in coal mining will become stranded - I have sold my shares in companies with coal mining assets.

Cheers
David

Click to expand...

Yep... Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

doctorwho said:

What would make a big difference would be if they allowed 2 way energy transfer to/from the car so that the car could act as a home battery when connected.

Click to expand...

For V2G to be useful you need lots of Vs. To have lots of Vs you need cheap batteries. If you have cheap batteries, the cost of static storage is reduced.

So why do unpredictable V2G when you can have relatively cheap completely predictable stationary storage? Utilities would have economy of scale with significantly lower per kWh installed battery cost and higher efficiency than at the consumer end, and I actually see that in the end it'll be the utilities that have the batteries across the grid, and if there's a battery in your home, it'll just be another thing they'll install based on your use/generation.

V2G is quite useful to reduce network capacity costs , this cost is hidden from most consumers but larger users pay it directly and it defined differently depending on the distribution company. in the ausgrid area if you create a peak load of 150KW during peak time you then pay 150 kw times 35c odd cents per day for 365 days even though you only used 150kw for 5 mins one day a year during peak time. the rest of the time you may only use 30kw. so the V2G system only needs to be able to deal with the spike to smooth power consumption to have a financial benefit

it will be interesting if tesla de-rate the power on their superchargers in Australia, because they are likely to be exposed to these costs. they might be exposed to them in other countries i don't know how other places bill users.

Gabz said:

V2G is quite useful to reduce network capacity costs , this cost is hidden from most consumers but larger users pay it directly and it defined differently depending on the distribution company. in the ausgrid area if you create a peak load of 150KW during peak time you then pay 150 kw times 35c odd cents per day for 365 days even though you only used 150kw for 5 mins one day a year during peak time. the rest of the time you may only use 30kw. so the V2G system only needs to be able to deal with the spike to smooth power consumption to have a financial benefit

it will be interesting if tesla de-rate the power on their superchargers in Australia, because they are likely to be exposed to these costs. they might be exposed to them in other countries i don't know how other places bill users.

Click to expand...

Yes, it affects Tesla as well. In his storage keynote JB Straubel showed how their battery at the Tejon Ranch supercharger has helped smooth the load and he noted that their Fremont factory has a large battery made up of multiple units and that they're expanding it.

Problem with relying on V2G is that:
- if you need the vehicle to be plugged in, you need not to be using it
- the amount each vehicle can supply will depend on the vehicle, its SoC and what people need to do with it before they leave
- the power each vehicle can supply will depend on the vehiclel, its SoC and the connection power.

Gabz said:

V2G is quite useful to reduce network capacity costs , this cost is hidden from most consumers but larger users pay it directly and it defined differently depending on the distribution company. in the ausgrid area if you create a peak load of 150KW during peak time you then pay 150 kw times 35c odd cents per day for 365 days even though you only used 150kw for 5 mins one day a year during peak time. the rest of the time you may only use 30kw. so the V2G system only needs to be able to deal with the spike to smooth power consumption to have a financial benefit

it will be interesting if tesla de-rate the power on their superchargers in Australia, because they are likely to be exposed to these costs. they might be exposed to them in other countries i don't know how other places bill users.

Click to expand...

I think Tesla's Superchargers are 120kW (160A @ 480V 3phase). Also it would be easy with a small amount of onboard smarts, including an RTC, to limit capacity during times of peak demand rather than down rate the charger totally.