As we move toward more plug-in electric vehicles, the idea seems to be they will charge at your house in the middle of the night. But assuming we also move toward more wind and solar energy, the middle of the night is not a good time (no sun, no wind). So should we instead be thinking about charging our EVs in the parking lot at work? Maybe put a solar panel on the roof of the vehicle so it doesn't have to be plugged in? Where is this all going? DeLoreans that run on trash?
-----Original Message----- From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2017 4:16 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Particularly good recent battery deals? I get 100% credit for the energy I produce. I have an $8.50 minimum bill. But if I am a net producer, the account gets zeroed out each March. I will not lose much as my array is sized just about right. -----Original Message----- From: Robert Andrews Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2017 3:13 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Particularly good recent battery deals? At least here in NV, it's only a 9/10ths offset and the offset is calculated month to month and settled at the end of the year. On 02/08/2017 12:00 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote: > There are numerous things which at utility-scale become more feasible > when storing energy. Flow batteries are a good example. Another is > storage of energy via various methods of potential energy such as > pumping water to a reservoir. Or cracking hydrogen from water and then > burning it when you need it. Or dozens of other options. > > I don't feel that every one of us maintaining our own storage system > is necessarily the most green idea. Generally as a homeowner I'll end > up buying a solution which may last 5 years and then I have to replace it. > Utilities can afford to buy 20 or 30 year lifetime storage plants. > When the conversation becomes 'how do we reform the grid so it is now > a sharing and storage system' then we can start talking about useful > things with the grid - and how to pay for it. The problem is that the > concept of what the grid is is not in line with what it needs to be come. > > The other thing you need to realize is that the cost of maintaining > the grid is the same whether you use it or not. The line to my house > costs the energy company the exact same money to maintain it whether I > pull no energy or a lot of energy. The sizing of the line is based on > peaks, not consumption. Just like sizing a wireless network - you > have to plan for worst case and your costs for the transmission lines > are set based on that worst case load. The problem is that the > billing for the transmission lines has always been set based on usage, not > peak load. > Solar is changing the ratio of demand to usage and in many cases > making it worse. I know of at least a few homeowners who have moved > their home heating to 100% electric - increasing their demand on the > grid during winter, and offsetting that 100% with solar during the summer > months. > The system needs to be sized for the winter loads - and the costs > associated with it are incurred accordingly. So those homeowners have > increased the cost of the transmission system by their winter demand, > yet are not paying anything at all to the utility company. (In the > cases I know of the net metering law permits 100% offset of the energy > charges). > > > > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Robert <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > They cannot "Store Energy" except by the process of not producing > it. i.e. turning the consumption down of fuel, or water or whatever > is turning the turbines. That does NOT cost them anything except > the lost profit of selling it to you. The infrastructure is paid > for at construction. Ask most developers or someone who doesn't > have power already plumbed to a location. Maintenance, yes it > calculated into the price per KW, and yes there is also fixed fees > that you pay as part of that. Reducing your consumption should > reduce your part of the Maintenance till you get to the fixed fee. > But adding another fee because you reduce your consumption is crazy. > > > On 2/7/17 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote: > > Here's the problem with net metering as I see it: > > Today, the simplistic net metering rules which were enacted > basically > require the utility company to take energy from you, "store it" > somehow, > and then return it to you at no cost to you. So the utility > company is > stuck with footing the bill for maintaining the line to you and > all the > infrastructure needed to fulfill your needs when the sun isn't > down. > This just doesn't seem fare, and yes, it drives the cost up for > all of > the 'solar have-nots'. > > On the other hand, some of the stuff the utility companies are > trying to > get away with is also highway robbery. Buying at wholesale > rates from > customers and selling it back to them at retail seems unfair. > Charging > "capacity fees" seems bad as well. The really irritating thing > is the > utilities who are starting to charge a 'solar used on the > premises' > charge which basically means if you are using solar to reduce > your grid > energy consumption and not selling excess back to the grid, > they'll > still charge you for being tied to the grid based on how much > capacity > you have. > > The quicker that the energy companies figure out that they are > not only > energy providers, but that they should be energy storage > companies as > well the better. That way, you could have a 'buy energy from the > energy company' rate, and a 'store energy for me rate'. And > none of > this crap they're trying to pull right now. If you don't want > to have > the utility company store it for you at whatever rate they're > charging, > then you go buy a powerwall and then only buy energy from the > utility > company when you need a bit here or there (subject to a meter > minimum or > similar). > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Robert Andrews > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> > wrote: > > What really sucks about this deal is that they claim that > they do > this so rich people who can afford solar are still > contributing to > the cost of maintaining the grid instead of transferring > that burden > to poor people. Cry me a fkn river... They kind of > neglect that > they are making up more than 20% line loss from solar plants > distributing source power closer to the loads. This is a > YUGE > savings off losses that they don't get compensated for and > goes > straight into their pockets. Fuel savings, build savings, > wear and > tear savings... They are a bunch of thieves looking in our > pockets > for their next golden parachute.. > > On 02/07/2017 08:55 AM, Harold Bledsoe wrote: > > Apologies to Eric for hijacking his thread... > > It does suck and the logic is flawed. Do they charge > more for folks > that switched to LED bulbs? No. Do they charge more > for folks that > have smaller houses, better insulation, or choose not to > run the AC > sometimes? No. > > If I had more free time I'd stand up for the principle > but at the > moment, islanding will just have to do. :-) I suppose > I could > try to > summon the reddit but I do still need electricity for now. > > -Hal > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 11:31 AM Chuck McCown > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>> wrote: > > I have 10 kW so it would be an extra $70... that > sucks. > Yeah, I would be buying batts and inverters too. > > *From:* Harold Bledsoe > *Sent:* Tuesday, February 07, 2017 9:24 AM > *To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Particularly good recent > battery deals? > When we first did it, we had to pay a $5/mo > "administrative" > fee for > having net metering. Effective Jan 1, they charge > an additional > $7/kw of installed capacity to offset the lower > power usage. > > I think this new charge literally effects only 1 of > their > customers. I believe their fear is that things like > Tesla > powerwall > will take off and they won't be able to afford their > current > lifestyle. ;-) > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 9:32 AM Chuck McCown > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: > > I pay 8.50/month. Flat rate. > So you are getting a demand charge added? > > *From:* Harold Bledsoe > *Sent:* Monday, February 06, 2017 5:37 PM > *To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Particularly good recent > battery > deals? > > Agreed! > > I'm going to pull the trigger and try the forklift > batteries. > Supposedly they will last 3-5x longer than > regular deep > cycle > golf cart batteries. I'll let you guys know in > 10-15 years. > > My motivation is that my home grid tied system > saves too > much > power so the power company added a net meter > fee of > $7/kw/mo to > make up the difference. > > Alrighty then, guess I'll take half my house off > grid. :-) > > Hal > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 1:27 PM Eric Kuhnke > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>> > wrote: > > Anything rated in CCA (cold cranking amps) > is not > suitable > for cyclic solar/wind power applications. > If the > manufacturer hasn't clearly specified Ah > capacity in > a table > at 5, 10, 20 hour rates it's not designed > for repeated > discharge. > > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 5:01 AM, Harold Bledsoe > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>> > wrote: > > Beware of deep cycle marine batteries. > These > typically > are not true deep cycle batteries. At > 50% depth of > discharge, you can expect around 300 > cycles (or > 1 year > if doing it daily). A true deep cycle > battery > will do > about 3x that number. > > On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 9:00 PM Keefe John > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: > > Exide has a 105 AH battery for $81 > > > > > http://www.menards.com/main/electrical/batteries-battery-chargers/auto > motive-lead-acid-batteries/exide-regng-27-12-month-nautilus-marine-dee > p-cycle-battery/p-1444430136307-c-9100.htm?tid=-3310133469912273928 > > <http://www.menards.com/main/electrical/batteries-battery-chargers/aut > omotive-lead-acid-batteries/exide-regng-27-12-month-nautilus-marine-de > ep-cycle-battery/p-1444430136307-c-9100.htm?tid=-3310133469912273928> > > > <http://www.menards.com/main/electrical/batteries-battery-chargers/aut > omotive-lead-acid-batteries/exide-regng-27-12-month-nautilus-marine-de > ep-cycle-battery/p-1444430136307-c-9100.htm?tid=-3310133469912273928 > > <http://www.menards.com/main/electrical/batteries-battery-chargers/aut > omotive-lead-acid-batteries/exide-regng-27-12-month-nautilus-marine-de > ep-cycle-battery/p-1444430136307-c-9100.htm?tid=-3310133469912273928>> > > > On February 5, 2017 4:55:55 PM CST, > Eric Kuhnke > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: > > Found this, sunelec.com > <http://sunelec.com> > <http://sunelec.com> <http://sunelec.com> > > (big solar equipment dealer for > off grid) is > selling the 106Ah version of > these for > $185 a > piece plus pallet shipping: > > > > > http://www.outbackpower.com/downloads/documents/Store_the_Energy/energ > ycell_re_top_terminal/energycellREtopterminal_specsheet.pdf > > <http://www.outbackpower.com/downloads/documents/Store_the_Energy/ener > gycell_re_top_terminal/energycellREtopterminal_specsheet.pdf> > > > <http://www.outbackpower.com/downloads/documents/Store_the_Energy/ener > gycell_re_top_terminal/energycellREtopterminal_specsheet.pdf > > <http://www.outbackpower.com/downloads/documents/Store_the_Energy/ener > gycell_re_top_terminal/energycellREtopterminal_specsheet.pdf>> > > Outback, as far as I know, doesn't > actually have > a battery factory. But they are > a fairly > large > company so they are relabeling > somebody > else's > deep cycle off grid design AGM > battery. > In terms > of $/Wh stored the only thing > that beats > it is > the 6V 225Ah wet cell batteries > from Trojan. > > > > On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 6:00 AM, > Harold > Bledsoe > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: > > I can across an interesting > tip / > option - > > Have you considered going > with forklift > batteries? They are flooded > lead acid > however I'm reading that > they can > last 3x > longer than golf cart > batteries in PV > applications. > > > > > http://gbindustrialbattery.com/Forklift_Battery_Sizes_and_Specificatio > ns_Zone15.html > > <http://gbindustrialbattery.com/Forklift_Battery_Sizes_and_Specificati > ons_Zone15.html> > > > <http://gbindustrialbattery.com/Forklift_Battery_Sizes_and_Specificati > ons_Zone15.html > > <http://gbindustrialbattery.com/Forklift_Battery_Sizes_and_Specificati > ons_Zone15.html>> > > I guess the weight is a > downside. > Just make > sure the whole family eats > their > Wheaties on > moving day. :-) > > Hal > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 7:11 > PM Eric > Kuhnke > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: > > Looking for a bunch of > 12V 100Ah > AGM top > terminal batteries for > off grid PV. > Wondering if anyone has > recently > got a > particularly good deal > for something > like the Trojan T31 or > similar. > > > > -- > > Harold Bledsoe > > > > > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 > Mail. > Please > excuse my brevity. > > -- > > Harold Bledsoe > > -- > > Harold Bledsoe > > > > > -- > *Forrest Christian* /CEO//, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc./ > Tel: 406-449-3345 <tel:406-449-3345> | Address: 3577 Countryside > Road, Helena, MT 59602 > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> | > http://www.packetflux.com > <http://www.packetflux.com/> > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian>> > <http://facebook.com/packetflux > <http://facebook.com/packetflux>> > <http://twitter.com/@packetflux > <http://twitter.com/@packetflux>> > > > > > > -- > *Forrest Christian* /CEO//, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc./ > Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | > http://www.packetflux.com <http://www.packetflux.com/> > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian> > <http://facebook.com/packetflux> <http://twitter.com/@packetflux> > >
