The german government sponsored report is a shill for big oil! More about people unable to afford the 2x more expensive power: In the near future, an average three-person household will spend about €90 a month for electricity. That's about twice as much as in 2000. Two-thirds of the price increase is due to new government fees, surcharges and taxes. But despite those price hikes, government pensions and social welfare payments have not been adjusted. As a result, every new fee becomes a threat to low-income consumers. Same article as above.
Consumer advocates and aid organizations say the breaking point has already been reached. Today, more than 300,000 households a year are seeing their power shut off because of unpaid bills. Caritas and other charity groups call it "energy poverty." Lawmakers, on the other hand, have largely ignored the phenomenon. In the concluding legislative period, the government and opposition argued passionately over a €5 increase in payments to the long-term unemployed. But no one paid much attention to the fact that those welfare recipients would subsequently see the extra €5 wiped out by higher electricity bills. Same thing the "shill" on quora wrote. Seems he knows his stuff and the facts check out.
Clearly the only solution is for Apple to make solar panels. Then Denny would buy them, doesn't matter the price.
Ref: Tesla batteries. I read about the new technology of the Tesla batteries about a year ago in one of the science magazines. I do not remember if it was DISCOVER or POPULAR MECHANICS, but the article got me excited. It sounds like it will be the system of the future. However. I was able to find enough info on the Tesla batteries to crunch some numbers. It did not take long to realize that the price vs storage capacity would not be affordable for most large battery banks, unless you are Paul Allen. At some point, the Tesla battery technology will probably drop in price, much like computers and solar panels have. Until they are a proven product that is affordable to the average person, I am staying with a battery system that is affordable and proven to work with large battery banks. I have had very good luck with the Trojan T105 6 volt 225AH batteries. Not the least expensive battery, but they are very reliable.
Lifehacker is an oil company shill. http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2016/01/tesla-powerwall-2016-pricing-number-crunch-and-payback-times/ For now, most people won’t get a very economically viable result from a Powerwall. Considering the warranty is for 10 years, a payback time higher than this is not ideal. To get a 10 year payback, electricity prices would need to be $0.40 a kWh – not an overly high figure. Some providers do variable pricing, but the Australian average is closer to 30 cents a kWh, which gives a 14 year or so payback time. For many people (such as myself), better payback can be had from simply keeping the money in an offset account. In the future, financing plans may improve the proposition.
I am use the Trojan T-125s 240AH. The number of cycles seems to be the best you can get. I have no way to compare with the Tesla stuff, no data. It is scary to see praise for this stuff with nothing to go on.
I believe your T125 also have thicker lead plates, which would make them a better choice for a boat. As you know boats take a beating out on big blue. A battery with thicker plates will hold up longer. Trojan batteries are also used on most commercial fishing boats.
Ah! KWh! Ok. I am currently storing 15.6 Kwh of energy, so I would need two to these batteries in parallel. Maybe the 7 and the 10 could team up for the job. That is 3000 + 3500 dollars for the battery bank? $6500 where as my Trojans cost me about $1800 and have a project life time of 7 years. Perhaps there is less weight which is needed for the car. But why would I give a shit to store energy for the house? I mean 4 Xs the price??? With the longevity unknown??? Just to save the power from off peak hours. I don't think so. Hell I designed the boat to use the battery weight as part of the ballast needed for stability. If I switched to lighter batteries at 4 x the price I need to add lead to maintain righting moment. I don't think so. https://www.quora.com/How-does-Teslas-Powerwall-work
Another reason installing solar panels on the roof of a home is not the best idea. The direction the roof faces and the pitch of the roof rarely are the optimum settings for solar panels. The answer to make up for the lost potential is to add more panels, sometimes a lot more will be needed. The easiest geographic location to install solar panels would be right on the equator. Just lay the panels flat on the ground, or flat on a raised frame. The further you are from the equator, the more critical it becomes to install them at the correct angle and direction, or you lose output. Another option is to have a panel system that tracks the sun. A sensor tells the panels where the sun is, and stepper motors keep the panels pointed directly into the sun. I have experimented with a smaller less technical version of this idea. I made an adjustable frame that only held a couple of panels. I had to manually move the panels, which I would do about three times a day for the test. Obviously this is not a long term plan. But I was curious how much difference it made to have the panels aligned with the sun vs stationary during different times of the day. When the sun was directly overhead, which is where the optimum setting would be on stationary panels, it did not make any difference. The further the sun was from directly overhead, the greater the increase in electricity. But the increase was not enough to overcome the additional cost of the moving frame, let alone adding motors and sensors. The best option for cost vs output was to calculate the optimum direction and angle for a stand alone system, then add extra panels to make up for the lower morning and afternoon production. Then forget about it, other than water level maintenance on the battery bank, your work is done.
Wouldn't it maximize the panel if you put reflective materials at conical angles around the panel..mirroring the sun's impact?
I am not sure how well that would work on solar panels? I did do some research on adding reflective material to channel sunlight for a solar smoker/food dehydrator I built. There is quit a bit of research that has been done on that subject. Most of it suggested that the results were not worth the cost and effort. Most solar food dehydrators do use a reflective system, but inside of the box, not outside. I keep thinking there is a way to make your idea work, but, so far no-one has found the right combination of answers. Get to work and make it happen, you could get wealthy.
Just a minor update. It appears Tesla has already dropped plans for one of the two batteries they wanted to build for the solar, home and business market, their largest battery. They still may build a smaller version for backup home use. Reason for killing the large battery project. High cost vs benefits did not pencil out.
The beauty of this technology is we can tax the rich to pay for it, and borrow $trillions, then send all that money to China where the stuff is made. Good economics. /sarcasm
We owe China over $1 trillion dollars. Some day they are going to want that money. They probably will repossess the Grand Canyon to build the world’s largest electric dam project. Then make their money back on the electricity they sell us. Hopefully we can talk them into repossessing some worthless, like Washington DC.
http://m.tdworld.com/smart-energy-consumer/tesla-discontinues-bigger-10-kwh-residential-battery The economics of batteries kills one of Tesla's battery offerings.
