By Rob Wile 19 hours ago
Posted on 02/27/2014 11:16:45 AM PST by ckilmer
Elon Musk just announced details of Tesla's plan to start pumping out lithium ion batteries like M&Ms at its planned "Gigafactory."
Obviously, it's big news for electric vehicles as this should bring down the cost of a very expensive component.
But it has equal and possibly greater significance for renewable energy.
We've explained that power storage is the key to unlocking widespread renewable energy. For renewables to be truly cost competitive with existing power sources, they need to be able to provide a continuous current flow, something difficult to achieve when the wind isn't blowing or sun isn't shining.
But the price to do so is currently exorbitant. Tom Leyden, the head of Solar Grid Storage, whose revolutionary container storage system on the side of a Maryland freeway we profiled a few months ago, says batteries currently represent 50% of the cost of one of his systems.
Which is why he's hailing Tesla's decision.
"If those prices comes down, our market expands, we can offer a lower priced product and put more storage in our system," he told us. "So this is very important."
Solar execs are comparing the current environment to where photovoltaic costs were in the last decade, just before their prices plummeted.
"At that point in time solar modules were very expensive, and the industry was pushing a couple of different alternatives: thin films were going to be photovoltaic of the future," said Tony Clifford, CEO of Standard Solar. His company also worked on the Maryland project.
But thanks to worldwide government incentives, he said, the price of traditional silicon ended up falling through the floor, paving the way for the current renewables boom.
In this case, of course, the marketplace is creating the demand for lithium ion batteries. But renewables will again be the beneficiaries.
"You're going to be able to drive costs out right across supply chain and see some significant cost reductions in storage technology."
A report from the Rocky Mountain Institute released prior to Tesla's announcement (spotted by GTM) was even more extreme about the possibilities for cheaper storage.
"Whereas other technologies, including solar PV and other distributed resources without storage, net metering, and energy efficiency still require some degree of grid dependence, solar-plus-batteries enable customers to cut the cord to their utility entirely," they write. "The coming grid parity of solar-plus-battery systems in the foreseeable future, among other factors, signals the eventual demise of traditional utility business models," the authors wrote.
Tesla's announcement represents a major step towards a larger, cheaper energy storage market that could have huge implications for making renewables more widespread.
I could make comments about how absurd the article is...but Karl Denniger (Market-Ticker.ORG) has a well written article that should be read ...
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=228809
Noticed that the choices are TX, NM, AZ and NV. Lots of vacant land where they can uh, dispose of toxic waste with a hall pass from the “lyin’ king”. NV with the most fed land at about 85%. EPA exemption anyone? After all, it is all about “green”.
I’m holding out for the dilithium crystals.
Where will all the lithium come from?
I was just about to post that article, but you beat me to it.
btt
tesseract for me, it beats dilithium hands down. Dilithium is always causing problems at the exact wrong time.
None of the stuff will come from here. Sierra Club will make sure no mining goes on here.
No thanks. IF the product can stand on its own merits - then let it stand on its own. Otherwise we are looking at a false model (Government picking the pockets of taxpayers to support an industry/product that might not otherwise be viable).
Obamacare prescription meds.
Yea, like mining and manufacturing the materials to make batteries, then dispose of them when done is all green right?
Hyperbole aside, cheap large Li batteries would be a boon to those who wish to live off grid, or even those with unreliable power service. My real hope is for the graphene supercapacitors to be engineered to a usable large scale.
Hydrogen production from solar is the key to true energy independence, individual liberty, and disaster resilience. Once every home is capable of hydrogen generation we will all be able to disconnect from the grid and produce our own fuel for our vehicles. If only all the money wasted on global warming were put into that technology we would be there already!
With batteries?
Eventually, this guy’s perpetual motion machine is going to stop too.
Truly a sucker born every minute.
He’s the next Steve Jobs. His $5B future superfund sight is going to be the next Solyndra. He can only issue bonds for $1.5B, and is putting in $1B of his own.
YOU ARE GOING TO PROVIDE THE OTHER $2.5B!!! That is, provided you are one of the 53% that still pay taxes in the US.
Where will all the lithium come from?
________________
Bipolars
How small? Let's look at the "average" nuclear power plant. We have 65 operating ones as of 2012. They range in size from 500 megawatts to about 4 gigawatts in output (electrical); their thermal output is about 3x that, because nuclear power is only about 30% efficient end-to-end. Across the industry these plants had a capacity factor (that is, the percentage of "nameplate" output over the year that they actually produce) of roughly 85%.
So let's assume that we can charge the batteries with 100% efficiency (real numbers are around 80%) and discharge them with the same efficiency (again, real numbers are materially lower and the laws of thermodynamics say that 100% efficiency is impossible.)
For how long would a fully-charged bank consisting of one full year's production of these batteries replace our 65 nuclear power plants?
That's fairly easy to compute: The "average" nuclear plant, adjusted for its capacity factor, produces approximately 1.14 Gigawatt/hours of power on average over a year. (That is, it produces more than 1.14 Gw/h when running, but since it's only operating at 85% of nameplate rating on average, with some of the time at 100%, some less, and some at zero such as when being refueled, the average is 1.14Gw/h of energy.)
In other words a full year worth of production of these batteries could allow us to shut off our nuclear power plants for 43.9 hours during that year, or approximately 1/200th of the year.
OMG! Hours? 43.9 hours? OMG!- thanks for the link - what an eye opener: http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=228809
More Tesla Pie-in-the-Sky.
As I have posted on other sites, there are legions of Tesla true believers who will seek to burn you at the stake if you say anything cross about Tesla. These Tesla Fanbois put the Apple Fanbois to shame.
To date, Tesla builds high-end cars (really nice ones, mind you) that are no cheaper than $60,000 with an $8,000 tax incentive. THe company turns no profit and investors have now valued this company at something on the order of $351 billion dollars.
But those who are in love with Tesla, mostly Lefty types, are true believers and have invested a lot of their emotion into Tesla.
...and how will the batteries be re-charged?
Why from those evil power generation factories!
Don’t they see their own hypocrisy?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.