How to get paid twice for electricity in the future.
Already happening in Germany.
Possible new source of income?
Is this why all those people who had panels installed are now being pestered
to have local storage installed as well. My friends say the way its being
explained makes no sense to them, how can inefficient batteries, for this is
what they are one assumes, actually make you more subsidy and or save money
more than feeding excess back into the grid?
It sounds bonkers to me.
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
Remember, if you don't like where I post
Its because you are paid for the electricity you generate, regardless of how much you use, if any, so if you can use all of it all too by storing it and using it when needed you save on electricity bills too
On Wednesday, October 5, 2016 at 5:01:07 PM UTC+1, Brian-Gaff wrote:
On Wednesday, 5 October 2016 17:01:07 UTC+1, Brian-Gaff wrote:
Only because you don't understand it.
Your friends must be pretty thick.
FIT payments are for power generated, not power exported.
So, even if you use the power generated yourself, you still get paid for it.
So if you can store some of the power generated in batteries, you can use it later. So cutting back on your (imported) electricity bill.
Looked at it myself.
For the money saved,the outlay is far too great.
However who knows at some time in the future?
In Germany when there is a surplus of power, they pay you to use (or store) it.
You can then export power into the grid from the batteries later and get paid.
Thus you get paid twice.
Once for importing, and once for exporting.
Now that should encourage people to install batteries thus solving the intermittancy problem!
On Wed, 5 Oct 2016 09:24:24 -0700 (PDT), harry
You wouldn't care to put some numbers to that would you, bearing in
mind that the market leader, the Tesla Powerwall, has a miserable
6.4kWh capacity? http://tinyurl.com/hfab5u3
Except that it isn't mathematically unrealistic.
There is enough power in the sun for each person to collect enough power to
satisfy their own personal needs (including charging up their electric car)
if we have a means to store it across the "dark" periods of the day/year.
Ditto for the majority of companies who don't use electricity as a "raw
material" in their production.
The fact that the storage costs aren't economic, doesn't make it
Except we don't. Which is where the mathematics shows it to be
completely unrealistic. And the mathematics doesn't just show its
uneconomic, it shows that for a broad range of 'possible' its not in
fact *possible* either.
Renewable energy *storage* is just cat belling.
I think you are mad. If someone says to me 'this burger costs £5' and I
say 'I only have £2 in my pocket' the mathematics is telling me I can't
have that burger unless I steal it.
(Of course as a reneawable energy person the concept of stealing from
others disguised as an altruistic act, comes naturally...)
Karl Marx said religion is the opium of the people.
But Marxism is the crack cocaine.
I know that we don't
the premise is that someone has invented a method and the response was "he
can't have, because it can't work"
I'm quite prepared to accept genuine engineering reasons why this "new"
storage proposal doesn't work, but the OP's claimed reason is just false
We have the basic technology now. Just fill your garage and garden shed up
with car batteries.
Oh people don't have garages anymore, Oh dear, what a sensible move that
That this costs more in batteries than just buying the electricity from the
grid doesn't make this mathematically impossible.
But that isn't the premise.
No-one mentioned that it was impossible because you only have 2 pounds, the
original claim was the equivalent of "you can't buy the burger because there
are enough cows".
Nothing in my post suggest that I support the concept that this technology
should be subsidised
There are no 'new' storage proposals. All are easily calculated and all
are well known, well tried, and discarded technology.
Wont do the job. Do the maths. There probably isn't enough lead in the
Well it does, if it bankrupts them so they starve instead of freeze.
Like I said, ALL the sums have to add up, not just one.
For example,. simple potential energy calculations show that I have very
similar potential energy in Cape town, as I do here, therefore I ought
to be able to get there wihout using any energy.
The problem is that I also have to visit every place in between and
elbow out of te way w2hatever was there first......and that is an
additional element that is not incorporated into the simplistic orginal sum.
All I need for a mobile phone battery to get me to Cap town is viable
All we need for renewable energy to be only half as useless as it is, is
But who will bell the cat?
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?
And these new storage methods are what? I'm interested. Different
batteries, i.e. different combinations of electrode materials? Or some
sort of fuel cell, or ICE cars running on hydrogen, or what? What
power density are they talking about?
I've grown suspicious over recent years about claims for this or that
technology that's 'being developed' or 'just around the corner'. It's
always jam tomorrow, never jam today. And if jam today does eventually
arrive, it's always much less tasty and spread very thinly and is
generally disappointing compared to what was promised, even though
packaged in a wonderful presentation jar with pretty ribbons (green
ones, of course), and presented to the sheeple as a wonderful
planet-saving development by a fat cat who's thinking only of the
subsidies he's going to get.
In a millenium we will have solved the problem of how to conatain a sun
and have fusion power, which will be stored in batteries made of unicorn
horn and pixie dust, that will enable them us fly a passenger place
three times round the world without recharging.
“It is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of
making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people
There do exist large-scale battery storage banks:
"The largest grid storage batteries in the United States include the
31.5MW battery at Grand Ridge Power plant in Illinois and the 31.5 MW
battery at Beech Ridge, West Virginia. Two batteries under construction
in 2015 include the 400MWh (100MW for 4 hours) Southern California
Edison project and the 52 MWh project on Kauai, Hawaii to entirely time
shift a 13MW solar farm's output to the evening"
so it does seem to be economically viable, otherwise these firms
wouldn't be doing it and it sure isn't "cat-belling", whatever the fuck
(='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10
On Sun, 23 Oct 2016 08:48:15 +0100, Mike Tomlinson
I remember it being suggested here a while ago, that every renewable
energy installation should be made to have its own local battery
storage with sufficient capacity to tide it over the hours of
darkness, dull days, doldrums or whatever.
For small island communities, battery storage may be viable and the
only way they can extend the availability of electricity, cost being
of lesser importance in that situation.
But for a whole country such as the UK, you'd be looking to store very
much bigger amounts of energy: 35GW times as many hours you expect
renewables not to be performing. For example in the depths of winter
and a 'blocking high' over Northern Europe lasting say three days,
that's 2520GWh, or 25,200 of those 100MW Southern California Edison
project batteries. And you'd actually have to have considerably higher
output from the renewables in order both to re-charge those batteries
and at the same time supply the grid in the normal way.
Whether that's a reasonable way to look at it, I don't know. There
seems to be an increasing number of planning applications for diesel
generation installations to cope with short-term peaks in demand on
the Grid (STOR), see http://tinyurl.com/zmmxmlz . Massive battery
capacity wouldn't be required there, any more than it is from the
diesel generators, a few MW for an hour or so here and there would
seem to be fairly typical.
Euan Mearns has a hard look at the possibilities of battery storage:
As for cat-belling, it's been explained here several times recently.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.