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 <i...@avantwireless.com
<mailto:i...@avantwireless.com>> 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
<i...@avantwireless.com <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com>
<mailto:i...@avantwireless.com <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com>>>
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
<ch...@wbmfg.com <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>
<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>>
<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>
<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>>>> 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:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
<mailto:af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>>
*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
<ch...@wbmfg.com <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>
<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>>> 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:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
<mailto:af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>>
*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
<eric.kuh...@gmail.com
<mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com> <mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com
<mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>>>
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
<hbledso...@gmail.com
<mailto:hbledso...@gmail.com> <mailto:hbledso...@gmail.com
<mailto:hbledso...@gmail.com>>>
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
<keefe...@ethoplex.com
<mailto:keefe...@ethoplex.com>
<mailto:keefe...@ethoplex.com
<mailto:keefe...@ethoplex.com>>> 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
<eric.kuh...@gmail.com
<mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>
<mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com
<mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>>> 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
<hbledso...@gmail.com
<mailto:hbledso...@gmail.com>
<mailto:hbledso...@gmail.com
<mailto:hbledso...@gmail.com>>> 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
<eric.kuh...@gmail.com
<mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>
<mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com
<mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>>> 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
forre...@imach.com <mailto:forre...@imach.com>
<mailto:forre...@imach.com <mailto:forre...@imach.com>> |
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
forre...@imach.com <mailto:forre...@imach.com> |
http://www.packetflux.com <http://www.packetflux.com/>
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian>
<http://facebook.com/packetflux> <http://twitter.com/@packetflux>
