Tesla Energy announcement

[Mac]

https://youtu.be/yKORsrlN-2k

It sounds like Elon Musk cares about the planet but rather than being like the standard enviro-wackos (I'm looking at you, Al Gore & David Suzuki) who live opulent lifestyles yet expect, nay demand that everyone else should move back into caves, Musk is looking for ways to actually work with people... Tesla Energy is dedicated to creating affordable and viable solutions to provide energy for the masses.

When Musk spoke of how mobile/cellular telephones leapfrogged the traditional telephone infrastructure and proposes his products could do the same, I can see why he is excited. Imagine the impact so such... AND he confirmed his commitment to putting the intellectual property into the public domain so others can build on his innovations!!

Perhaps it's not just a fluke that Musk started off Tesla to build a fast electric roadster? His vision of the future is looking pretty attractive!!

Mac

 

[timfitz63]

It sounds like Elon Musk cares about the planet but rather than being like the standard enviro-wackos (I'm looking at you, Al Gore & David Suzuki) who live opulent lifestyles yet expect, nay demand that everyone else should move back into caves, Musk is looking for ways to actually work with people... Tesla Energy is dedicated to creating affordable and viable solutions to provide energy for the masses.

When Musk spoke of how mobile/cellular telephones leapfrogged the traditional telephone infrastructure and proposes his products could do the same, I can see why he is excited. Imagine the impact so such... AND he confirmed his commitment to putting the intellectual property into the public domain so others can build on his innovations!!

Perhaps it's not just a fluke that Musk started off Tesla to build a fast electric roadster? His vision of the future is looking pretty attractive!!

I largely agree with your assessment of Musk and Tesla insofar as he seems to be making a practical attempt at producing a viable electric car. I'd say my main source of trepidation with these types of cars is whether the technology will ultimately support it to the point of true viability...

Battery development has come a long way since either of us were kids; heck, it wasn't all that long ago when one was lucky to get a few hours out of a laptop battery, and now they'll pretty-much last all day long. But the amount of power required to propel a vehicle is just factors of magnitude above what is required to power a laptop or smart phone. I think Tesla's current claim is 265 miles on a single charge -- which is pretty impressive -- but then (according to Tesla itself) one is stuck with an almost 3-and-a-half day recharge cycle (using a standard 110-volt outlet on a fully-depleted battery pack) before continuing a journey... So, even the Tesla is impractical for longer, cross-country journeys -- which means the internal combustion engine remains the best all-around choice for personal transportation...

But as they say, Rome was not built in a day...

 

[Mac]

But as they say, Rome was not built in a day...

Indeed, Tesla has a long way to go before they can claim the kind of functionality of internal combustion engines, let alone having the kind of recharging infrastructure to make gasoline distribution... but those gas stations didn't crop up overnight either.

What a shame Musk didn't get hooked on hydrogen as a fuel source instead of electric. Imagine how far he could have pushed that technology.

Mac

 

[timfitz63]

Indeed, Tesla has a long way to go before they can claim the kind of functionality of internal combustion engines, let alone having the kind of recharging infrastructure to make gasoline distribution... but those gas stations didn't crop up overnight either...

I think if it ever became truly viable, the distribution network is effectively in place: electrical power is available nearly everywhere -- including existing gas stations. It wouldn't be very hard at all for those stations to install a row of 'universal' 240-volt/40-amp charging stations/connections.

But again, the problem is the time involved for the user: even using Tesla's purpose-designed-and-built charging stations (which simultaneously provides the equivalent of a dual recharging connection providing 240 volts at 80 amps), Tesla's current line of vehicles would require 4.5 hours to fully recharge a depleted battery. And that's only usable if one's vehicle is outfitted with the dual charger option...

Keep in mind as well: Tesla's 265-mile range estimate is probably with minimal (or no) accessory usage. Meaning that the radio is off (or at low volume), the navigation system is off, the BlueTooth connection to one's phone is off, the HVAC system is off (or at minimal output), lights are off, etc., etc., etc. Every modern convenience feature that one turns on draws available power away from the drivetrain -- and reduces range...

... What a shame Musk didn't get hooked on hydrogen as a fuel source instead of electric. Imagine how far he could have pushed that technology.

It would have been interesting to see... Hydrogen fuel does seem to be more analogous to petroleum in the ability to refuel quickly and continue on one's way. It's main downside is that, since very little hydrogen exists in its 'naturally-useable state,' it has to effectively be manufactured (as opposed to refined, as in the case of petroleum) -- and it requires more energy to produce it than the product yields in return...

 

[Mac]

I think if it ever became truly viable, the distribution network is effectively in place: electrical power is available nearly everywhere -- including existing gas stations. It wouldn't be very hard at all for those stations to install a row of 'universal' 240-volt/40-amp charging stations/connections.

Very true and the logical location for re-energizing an electric car.

But again, the problem is the time involved for the user: even using Tesla's purpose-designed-and-built charging stations (which simultaneously provides the equivalent of a dual recharging connection providing 240 volts at 80 amps), Tesla's current line of vehicles would require 4.5 hours to fully recharge a depleted battery. And that's only usable if one's vehicle is outfitted with the dual charger option...

While 4.5 hours is much better than 3.5 days, it's still a considerable amount of time. Mind you, the majority of folks commute to work and around town so less than 50 miles. Plug in every second night or so... no issue... The other alternative would be to have hot swappable batteries so the service station could recharge at their leisure and still get the electric cars in & out within minutes much like a gasoline refill.

Keep in mind as well: Tesla's 265-mile range estimate is probably with minimal (or no) accessory usage. Meaning that the radio is off (or at low volume), the navigation system is off, the BlueTooth connection to one's phone is off, the HVAC system is off (or at minimal output), lights are off, etc., etc., etc. Every modern convenience feature that one turns on draws available power away from the drivetrain -- and reduces range...

It also depends on how heavy your foot is as well. My friend who has a Tesla found this out the hard way, much to his chagrin. He drove from Ottawa to Toronto (roughly 250 miles) but didn't quite make it.

It would have been interesting to see... Hydrogen fuel does seem to be more analogous to petroleum in the ability to refuel quickly and continue on one's way. It's main downside is that, since very little hydrogen exists in its 'naturally-useable state,' it has to effectively be manufactured (as opposed to refined, as in the case of petroleum) -- and it requires more energy to produce it than the product yields in return...

Indeed, hydrogen production is energy intensive to create. So long as a strategic reserve was created, the non-polluting energy sources (solar, wind, hydro) could be used in the production.

Mac

 

[82ColEd]

While the only cars i would even consider in that area are the Tesla's or the I8, i am really on the fence, because as far as i have heard (and i am not really into the field) the batteries take oodles to make (resource wise; ie China, Canada, shipping etc) and are a pain to get rid of when done.. Haven't delved into it, but that kinda sways this for me, though i still find it fascinating..


Stefan

 

[timfitz63]

... While 4.5 hours is much better than 3.5 days, it's still a considerable amount of time. Mind you, the majority of folks commute to work and around town so less than 50 miles. Plug in every second night or so... no issue...

Absolutely. Daily commutes are aimed right in the electric car's wheelhouse. But a lot of folks still take long driving trips, which means they'd still have to keep a vehicle with an internal combustion engine for those trips. And for those who can only afford to buy/keep one vehicle, the initial and recurring costs connected to the electric car -- along with the inability to use it on long trips -- would dictate that single-vehicle families would still go with a vehicle powered by an internal combustion engine.

... The other alternative would be to have hot swappable batteries so the service station could recharge at their leisure and still get the electric cars in & out within minutes much like a gasoline refill...

That's an intriguing thought. But it would probably require electric cars to use standardized battery packs that are easily accessible and potentially removable by the owner/operator. The current weight and installation locations of the battery packs make the latter criteria challenging to say the least; and since the final form of the technology still somewhat sketchy, it will be difficult to standardize the packs until that become more clear. But your concept is certainly viable.

... It also depends on how heavy your foot is as well. My friend who has a Tesla found this out the hard way, much to his chagrin. He drove from Ottawa to Toronto (roughly 250 miles) but didn't quite make it...

Which presents another practical problem to owners of electric cars: In the [worst] case of fuel depletion in a remote location, owners of vehicles powered by an internal combustion engine need only walk to the nearest gas station with a gas can, then walk some fuel back to their vehicle so they can drive it back to the gas station. If an electric car is stranded remotely with a depleted battery, it will probably require a tow to get it somewhere where it can be recharged -- even if gas stations begin offering a charging row. Either that, or they (or tow trucks) have to carry around a portable generator to put enough 'juice' on the battery pack to get the car to a charging station...

... Indeed, hydrogen production is energy intensive to create. So long as a strategic reserve was created, the non-polluting energy sources (solar, wind, hydro) could be used in the production.

True. But as we've been discussing in other threads, those sources of power generation are less efficient and/or often criticized by the 'green' crowd for their other deleterious environmental effects (harmful to wildlife, etc.)...

It seems like the 'green' crowd only wants modern conveniences that run on happy thoughts and fairy dust...

While the only cars i would even consider in that area are the Tesla's or the I8, i am really on the fence, because as far as i have heard (and i am not really into the field) the batteries take oodles to make (resource wise; ie China, Canada, shipping etc) and are a pain to get rid of when done.. Haven't delved into it, but that kinda sways this for me, though i still find it fascinating..

Well, that's really the problem with the marketing of these vehicles as 'green:' unlike you, few seem to explore past the surface claims of "zero-emissions." The power that charges the batteries is generated somewhere, usually (in this country, at least) by coal-fired plants. The technology is still costly, both to produce, maintain, and repair; and it doesn't deliver the all-around performance/convenience of the existing technology (i.e., the internal combustion engine). Battery disposal is an issue that doesn't seem to have been fully addressed.

All things considered, it may be (pardon the pun) a bridge too far for electric cars to replace the internal combustion engine...

 

[ROCKETBLOCK]

I'm reading a lot about hydrogen energy here. You still have to drive somewhere to buy it like you do gasoline. Electric in most cases can be replenished while your cat sits in your garage. I would like to say good bye to "stations".

The other point being made here about if you don't have electricity in your area you can just go to the gas station and fill up your internal combustion car. If there is no electricity the pumps aren't going to work very good at the gas station either. Perhaps having solar panels to charge your car might be the best way.

TESLA is the future.

 

[Hib Halverson]

Indeed, Tesla has a long way to go before they can claim the kind of functionality of internal combustion engines, let alone having the kind of recharging infrastructure to make gasoline distribution... but those gas stations didn't crop up overnight either.

What a shame Musk didn't get hooked on hydrogen as a fuel source instead of electric. Imagine how far he could have pushed that technology.

Mac

Mac...you get one of my Beacon of Reality Awards.

Indeed Elon Musk seems to be trying to make a success with the electrification of the automobile but Tesla continues to loose money in a big way. His investors are not going to stick it out unless he can make money. Imagine Tesla's sales if politicians in the US Congress got smart and axed all the tax incentives which have become nothing more than another method of wealth redistribution. Without those incentives, would Teslas sell in the volume they do now?

Doubtful.

Tesla also needs to gets some more varied product in the pipeline, too. Musk needs a mid-sized SUV and a smaller, more affordable car to compete with GM's Volt, both of which are said to be in development but are lagging.

The idea of going after the back-up power market with Tesla's battery technology makes some sense.

In the end, however, I'm you, electric cars are the big wet dream of the enviers. All they really do is transfer the "carbon footprint" to electrical utilities. A better way to go is fuel cells, but then...the question becomes the hydrogen supply infrastructure.

 

[Mac]

Perhaps the new Tesla Energy product for household and industrial use will provide the impetus (and profit) to push the automotive development?

Certainly, the price is palatable, easily comparable to household backup power generators. A natural gas generator large enough to provide full household power would run roughly $4500 plus installation; this is something I've considered because my neighbourhood is mature (many trees) and the power infrastructure is aboveground and dated 1960s so power outages occur regularly. If a Tesla Energy system provided similar functionality at a lower price, I might consider such, even without solar panels to recharge the battery. Actually, if the Tesla Energy product was programmable to provide power at times of my choosing, it might be quite an attractive option.

I live in Ontario which has some of the highest electricity rates in North America due to the government's ridiculously subsidized rates to "green" energy producers like wind & solar. The high rates are especially during so called "peak" hours (7 am to 7 pm weekdays). The graduated rates were designed to prompt folks to conserve energy (theoretically) but when people responded by drastically cutting usage during "peak" hours, it cut revenues to the government monopoly power providers so they ended up raising all of the rates. Thank you, sir, may I have another?

So if a Tesla battery allowed me to run the air conditioner in the summer and/or furnace during the winter off-grid, then recharged during the off-peak hours, it would represent a substantial cost savings to me. Add in a set of solar panels and I might be close to off-grid living without substantial lifestyle change.

Mac

 

[timfitz63]

Tesla's "Energy Wall" is an interesting concept, and would seem to offer great promise taken at face value. But I remain the engineering skeptic when it comes to the practical viability of the technology...

One of the things Musk did not share during his technology conference introducing the product was exactly how long it took to charge the banks of battery cells using electricity collected solely via solar panels. I'm also a bit skeptical of his claim that all of the power needs for the country could be supplied by a concentration of solar collectors in the Texas panhandle, but I'll concede that point for the moment...

Additionally, I'm wondering if his prices include the necessary equipment (i.e., inverter) that handles the conversion of power from DC battery to AC for general household use...? Cars run very happily on DC power, as could household lighting; but most household appliances require AC power... And like with all energy transfer processes, there will be efficiency losses... Musk just seemed to gloss over a lot of the practical details in favor of simply wowing the 'green' crowd with his ideas for a long-elusive, truly-renewable energy source...

 

[Mac]

True enough, a good quality inverter is necessary. Depending on the product, some equipment reacts poorly to non-sinusoidal AC. Perhaps it is an integral part of the Power Wall? I've seen equipment rendered useless by 'dirty' power inversion in vehicle applications. The difference in price for inverters suitable for installation in vehicles (sinusoidal vs cheapo knockoff) is usually 4x as much.

I'm not surprised Musk didn't specify the recharge time for the Power Wall via solar or other "green" source. Take solar cells for example. How they perform depends on their installation/orientation, the amount of sunlight per day, etc. So many factors involved, each installation would be different, even with the same equipment. Likewise wind generation.

Mac

 

[Scottsredvette]

Maybe in a few years when they get the price down and have better capacity,,,, until then, I'm more that happy with my natural gas powered 11 kw whole house generator. And, installed price under 6 grand including the auto transfer switch.


Tesla's New Battery Doesn't Work That Well With Solar - Bloomberg Business

 

[timfitz63]

Tesla's New Battery Doesn't Work That Well With Solar - Bloomberg Business

Hmm. So once again, the hype outshines the facts... Engineering skepticism, it seems, is a healthy thing when these 'green' technologies are involved...

Where Tesla itself is concerned: I just can't get past the seemingly continuous stream of quiet announcements and new pieces that counter the promises of their 'green' technology -- and challenge Tesla's viability as a corporate entity. No company ever survives by losing money -- which is all that Tesla has seemed to do thus far. Granted, they could have a technological breakthrough tomorrow that vaults them to the forefront of these industries; but I'm just not seeing it happening...

 

[Scottsredvette]

I truly hope that Musk can come up with a viable system. Think of how helpful it could be in a disaster situation. Have some sort of flatbed mounted system that could roll up to a site and be ready to roll. Not a big fan of solar and wind power either, don't see a good way to store the power generated by them. I'll stick my foot in my mouth,,,, I'm a fan of nukes, as long as they're not built on a fault line or on the coast.......

 

[timfitz63]

I truly hope that Musk can come up with a viable system. Think of how helpful it could be in a disaster situation. Have some sort of flatbed mounted system that could roll up to a site and be ready to roll...

Wouldn't bother me in the least if he did; I'm all for improving life and reducing wasteful practices. The main thing to which I object is the path we (as a society) seem to be taking in trying to get there. Rather than letting technology develop in due course, keeping what is best and moving forward from whatever doesn't work, there seems to be a growing trend to embrace a [politically] attractive concept before it is demonstrated to be truly viable -- either financially or technologically...

Yes, I realize all inventions and developments sometimes require time to become fully realized; Edison didn't develop the incandescent light bulb in one try. But the lightbulb came to market -- and was successful -- based on its own merits and the consumers' demand for it; not because political interests lobbied to subsidize its development and accelerate its introduction simply because they were enamored with the concept...

... Not a big fan of solar and wind power either, don't see a good way to store the power generated by them...

Well, the main detractors with solar and wind energy are collection efficiency and equipment costs -- in addition to power storage for use during nighttime hours, overcast conditions, and/or calm winds. if Tesla can develop a viable and cost-effective battery storage system that has the capacity to harness and deliver the power demanded, solar and wind power would become more viable energy sources. But I say: let him do it on his own dime, just like Edison did...

... I'll stick my foot in my mouth,,,, I'm a fan of nukes, as long as they're not built on a fault line or on the coast.......

Nuclear [fission] power seems to be on the opposite end of the spectrum: a large and relatively efficient power-production capability, saddled with obviously detrimental waste byproducts and operational safety concerns. Coal-fired plants have similar pros and cons. Hydroelectric, geothermal, and tidal plants are effectively restricted to regions having geographical attributes favorable to those methods of power production.

Once again, there's just no perfect solution...

 

[Mac]

Once again, there's just no perfect solution...

Tis the nature of the beast.

I'm with Scott re: nuclear power but, if anything, I'm more radical.

I propose they build nuclear power plants in the area of the bitumen fields of Alberta. One of the cleanest methods of separating oil from the sands is heat... which is a natural byproduct of nuclear fission. So produce electricity, use the heat to extract and refine the oil sands... become an energy supplier rather than just shipping the raw bitumen to be processed elsewhere, especially since many of the refineries are close to oceans where spills are much more difficult to deal with.

I'm fairly sure if the eco-wackos heard my proposal, they would have a collective conniption.

Mac

 

[ROCKETBLOCK]

Maybe in a few years when they get the price down and have better capacity,,,, until then, I'm more that happy with my natural gas powered 11 kw whole house generator. And, installed price under 6 grand including the auto transfer switch.


Tesla's New Battery Doesn't Work That Well With Solar - Bloomberg Business

He Scottsredvette; Price and capacity are still in the (not too) far future. If there is a large power outage in your area you aint gonna get "natural" gas to run that generator. How do you think natural gas is delivered? I have a whole house generator and it costs a lot of $$$ in natural gas to run it. My guess is several hundred dollars a month. I think we are talking apples and oranges here.

Rod

 

[Scottsredvette]

He Scottsredvette; Price and capacity are still in the (not too) far future. If there is a large power outage in your area you aint gonna get "natural" gas to run that generator. How do you think natural gas is delivered? I have a whole house generator and it costs a lot of $$$ in natural gas to run it. My guess is several hundred dollars a month. I think we are talking apples and oranges here.

Rod

I've had more power outages (thank-you Consumers) in the two years I've been back in Michigan than I ever had in 38 years in Colorado, and I was on an REA out in the middle of nowhere. Longest here being almost two weeks. Never lost the natural gas in any of our Michigan outages. I powered the furnace with a small 2kw Honda gasoline generator. That was a problem seeing as how I had to drive to the next town to find a gas station with electricity to pump gasoline. And, that poor little 2kw couldn't run much. If I lose natural gas, well, that probably means I've lost the house or neighborhood. I'm guessing a battery system wouldn't survive a catastrophe either.
My brother in law and sister live south about 50 miles and were out for almost a month last year. Cost him $150.00 to run his whole house generator for that one.