JRP3 wrote:Lead acid home systems have worked well for years
Bullcrap. Existing off-grid battery options for joe public suck, and are a big reason why the few people who do install renewables go grid-tie with net-metering.
JRP3 wrote:Lead acid home systems have worked well for years


mos6507 wrote:JRP3 wrote:Lead acid home systems have worked well for years
Bullcrap. Existing off-grid battery options for joe public suck, and are a big reason why the few people who do install renewables go grid-tie with net-metering.


mos6507 wrote:JRP3 wrote:Lead acid home systems have worked well for years
Bullcrap. Existing off-grid battery options for joe public suck, and are a big reason why the few people who do install renewables go grid-tie with net-metering.

JRP3 wrote:Don't tell that to the thousands of people living off grid with wind and solar for years.


rangerone314 wrote:They ARE expensive. A set of lead acid forklift batteries suitable for home use costs like $5,000 and is really heavy.




I've gotta say, this is the first logical fallcy I notice you use, which is pretty impressive for this forum. But back OT, grid-tie is dominant because of the nature of consruction. If I could get back the thousands of dollars it cost to connect my house to the grid, I would be inclined to consider battery storage, but as it stands people can't get that money back, so they go with grid-tied installs.mos6507 wrote:Thousands of off-gridders in a country of 300+ million people pretty much says it all. It wouldn't only be mere thousands if batteries were better.
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!

JRP3 wrote:by shallow cycling they would have a very long life..



mos6507 wrote:JRP3 wrote:by shallow cycling they would have a very long life..
Is a battery that is never used, still a battery? A battery is there presumably to be used. Avoiding going over a certain DOD, or firing up a gas or diesel generator occasionally to top it off, is all part of why they suck and why it's holding back off-grid and EV adoption.

ZENN, you may recall, owns a minority stake in Texas-based EEStor Inc., which is building a new energy-storage device based on ultracapacitor technology that could – if it works as promised – render conventional electro-chemical batteries obsolete. In addition to ZENN's 10.7 per cent ownership of EEStor, the company also has exclusive rights to use the technology in vehicles with a curb weight of up to 1,400 kilograms.
The Star in March 2006 was the first newspaper in the world to write about EEStor, which is partly funded by venture capital powerhouse Kleiner Perkins Caufield and Byers and has collaborated with Lockheed Martin to develop power-packed military weapons.


JRP3 wrote:However for some people living far enough from the grid battery systems are already cheaper than trying to connect to the grid.


TheAntiDoomer wrote:Hamilton: Race is on to build a better electric-car battery
http://www.thestar.com/business/cleanbr ... ar-battery


EEStor, the ultracapacitor company that has produced more obscure technology milestone announcements than evidence of a working energy storage unit, may have an implied market value of more than $1.5 billion.
The secretive startup in Austin, Texas, claims to have developed a new kind of capacitor that can store enough energy to propel an electric car 300 miles on a single charge. The company is not publicly traded, so investors who want to speculate on its “breakthrough technology” claims have only one way to get in on the action: Zenn Motor Company (ZNN: CA) That publicly traded Canadian firm, which first made an equity investment in EEStor in 2007, has upped its stake at each key milestone, culminating in a 10.7% ownership stake today. As a result, investors in effect get a small investment in EEStor as part of the deal.





Demoth wrote: I'm hoping if this tech is legit, the feds will make EEStor share the patent rights with all comers for a minimal cost, thus making it widely and quickly adopted.

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests