TESLA AND THE ENERGY MARKET

I still consider it somewhat ironic that this is the case considering the real Tesla’s personal work, motives, and desires regarding energy distribution. Still, it is definitely a step in the right direction.

Will Tesla’s Battery for Homes Change the Energy Market?

Tesla did not reveal the price of its larger batteries for businesses and utilities, but it will sell residential models for $3,000—$3,500

Credit: Tesla

More on this Topic

Tesla Motors, the electric-car maker based in Palo Alto, California, has announced that it will sell versions of its battery packs directly to consumers to help to power their homes, as well as to businesses that run larger facilities, and utility companies.

At a press conference in Los Angeles on April 30, the company’s charismatic founder Elon Musk said that the firm’s lithium-ion batteries would enable economies to move to low-carbon energy sources. Solar energy sources are erratic—but by storing their energy and then releasing it when required, batteries could solve that problem, he said.

Many other companies also sell stationary battery storage for buildings and for power grids—but analysts say that the technology is still too expensive for widespread use. Here, Nature explores whether Tesla’s announcement might change the game.

Has Tesla just invented a new battery technology?
No. The company’s packs contain standard lithium-ion batteries based on tried-and-tested technology, which are similar to those that many other firms have on the market.

Although companies and academic labs are pouring billions of dollars into research and development to significantly increase the amount of energy that batteries can store and to lower their cost, it could take years before significant breakthroughs reach the market (see ‘The rechargeable revolution: A better battery’).

Has Tesla managed to cut the cost of battery storage?
Possibly—but it’s unclear. Cosmin Laslau, an analyst for Lux Research, a consulting company in Boston, Massachusetts, says that he thinks Tesla’s batteries may be a bit cheaper than their competitors, although not by a lot.

Tesla did not reveal the price of its larger batteries for businesses and utilities, but it will sell residential models for US$3,000—3,500, or a cost of about $350 per kilowatt-hour (kWh) of energy stored. But that price tag does not include electronics that are required for connecting a battery to a home system, nor installation costs. Together, these costs could more than double the final price for residential consumers.

The internal production cost of lithium-ion battery cells (the cylindrical elements that store energy inside a battery, and which Tesla buys from Japanese electronics giant Panasonic) is generally thought to be around $200 per kWh, according to Mohamed Alamgir, director of research at LG Chem Power in Troy, Michigan, a subsidiary of the South Korean chemistry giant LG Chem. Incorporating those cells into a battery pack typically doubles costs, so that a battery the size of Tesla’s could cost about $4,000 to produce. Tesla could be selling these products at a loss for the time being, says Laslau, but could turn that loss into a profit once it scales up production at the $5-billion battery ‘gigafactory’ it is building in Nevada.

Does a home need a battery?
Most homes in the Western world probably do not. In places that have a good connection to the electricity grid, and where grid power is reliable, households do not need batteries for backup. And even those homes that have solar panels on the roof and extra energy to spare can use the grid itself as their battery: in many places, such as Germany and several US states, homeowners can sell their excess power during the day to the local electricity utility, and buy it back at night.

But the world’s electricity utilities and power grids themselves need more inexpensive energy storage. Countries that have been aggressively installing solar panels and wind turbines but that have not invested enough in energy storage have had trouble integrating the extra capacity into their grids. Germany, for example, has provided lavish subsidies for homeowners who installed solar panels, but when residents installed more photovoltaics than expected, electricity utilities had to spend more to keep the grid running smoothly, says Haresh Kamath, an energy-storage expert at the Electric Power Research Institute in Palo Alto. “The effects of unplanned deployment can be dangerous in terms of grid reliability,” he says.

Could today’s lithium-ion batteries meet utility firms’ needs?
When utilities need to manage loads on the grid, it is still cheaper for them to fire up gas turbines. The US Department of Energy estimates that for energy storage to be competitive, it must not cost much more than $150 per kWh. Assuming a cost of $700 per kWh, Tesla’s systems are still much more expensive than that. Right now, the cheapest way to store energy is to pump it uphill into a hydropower reservoir—where one is available. The next-best storage solution is to compress air in large underground reservoirs.

But even if they cannot economically store hours’ worth of a country’s energy needs, batteries can help to make the grid more reliable. And the US energy department’s target does not take into account the social costs of carbon emissions, says Jeff Dahn, a battery researcher at Dalhousie University in Halifax, Canada. “If there was an appropriate price associated with the generation of carbon, we’d all be using solar panels and paying whatever it costs to store electricity,” he says.

This article is reproduced with permission and was first published on May 1, 2015.

Advertisements

PRINTED CAR – BRAINSTORM

The Printed Car – Business Insider

Is this the future of manufacturing? To some degree I believe it is, although eventually I see many such items being grown rather than printed.

WORKS IN PROGRESS

For the rest of this week I will not be posting any original content to this blog or any of my blogs. Recently, due to my work schedule and other obligations, I have had very little time to work on the overall construction and the technical aspects of my blog(s). I had planned to complete those aspects of my blogs long ago but other things kept interfering.

So this week I have decided to spend the entire week finishing my originally conceived construction-plans of my blogs to make it easier for new business partners, business writers, inventors, investors, manufacturers, and venture capitalists to find me and to communicate and work with me.

To that end I will spend the rest of the week finishing my original plans and retooling this site.

As I said, as it stands now I plan to add no more original content this week so as to finally finish my original designs without interruption or any more delays.

However you can still find a great deal of useful content in the various Categories already present on this blog, and on the Categories of all of my other blogs. Just pick the categories that interest you and browse at will. Uncategorized will allow you to find everything.

I will also be sharing useful articles, content, and posts I find on other sites as I run across them and time allows. But most of my time this week will be spent on blog development.

Thank you for being a Reader and Follower of my blogs, I appreciate your patronage and hope you find my blogs enjoyable, entertaining, and most especially, useful.

THE SCIENCE, AND THE ART, OF TECHNOLOGICAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT

A friend posted this article earlier today on his Facebook page and I have enough personal interest in the subject and the idea occurs often enough in my own inventions, business projects, and writings that I thought I would comment here on the Launch Port.

The iron could have been inserted later, but my general supposition is that Iron, and possibly even Steel development occurred long before what is historically accounted, in certain isolated areas or as a result of individual experiments by certain particularly gifted smiths.

The “Ages” we attribute to history are really just generalizations on wide-spread (what we would call today industrial and/or historical) development. History implies within the very term that there must be an historical record of a thing, and that this record must be available for recognition and study. Without an historical record of some kind there is no history, but whether any particular thing actually exited or not sans an historical record, that is an entirely separate matter.

But smithing used to be art as much as science and some genius (or geniuses) at any particular period of history (or prehistory or non-history) could have easily leapt well ahead of his contemporaries and either the local ruler(s) suppressed wide-spread dissemination of such techniques or the smith himself (for personal and economic reasons) simply kept the secrets to himself and only manufactured small numbers of such artefacts or weapons. Then again local logistical matters and proper supplying may have prevented iron making en masse (as happened with the Hittites and Egyptians), or it could have been a one-off experiment or even an accident that smith was never able to properly reproduce. My father used to be a tool and dye maker and I saw him conduct any number of one-off experiments which he did not properly document or detail and then he later had trouble reproducing.

We moderns, because of our peculiar “industrial techniques” (that is we concentrate as much upon reproducible manufacturing techniques as we do experimental manufacturing methods) think of manufacturing as purely a science, but I suspect most of our ancestors tended to look upon smithing as primarily an art or at the very least an individualized enterprise of high personal skill and craft. We are scientists who like to mimic art in our productions, they were likely artists who were also proto-scientists, but only proto-scientists. Strict record keeping and precise reproduction was probably not a big concern in their worldview. Actually individualization was probably a far bigger concern for them and for their rulers.

Then again you have those recent historical cases of things like the +Ulfberh+t swords where long materiel trade lines combined with unique individualized skill and craft operations to produce weapons and artefacts well ahead of the rest of the world. That is to say there was some localized sub-masse production but for logistical, military, and economic reasons not mass production.

(After all someone has to be the best in the world – just look at US weapon systems compared to most of the rest of the world. Some archaeologist in the far-future, if records are lost or compromised, might assume that there was no US Superpower Age until much later than actually really occurred because the rest of the world is decades if not centuries behind us. The Truth is that is some respects we’re just decades or centuries ahead of everyone else in our weapon systems development, they are not necessarily decades or centuries behind us.)

I suspect the real Truth is that it is a normal thing throughout history and pre-history for some geniuses or particularly cunning individuals to leap well ahead of the curve where the rest of the world is concerned, and when you have ages or eons where it is uncommon to keep records or to store such records properly or even near the artefacts these geniuses create then it is easy to assume that nothing occurs until it becomes obviously apparent to everyone via mass production, or through common usage. But small scale or individualized examples of the thing might have very well existed centuries before such things become common. And because of their small number of productions it is easy to see such examples misplaced, looted, or destroyed and therefore not available for historical discovery or examination.

Truth is someone right now is creating something decades if not centuries ahead of everyone else but it won’t become recognized and it won’t be the “Age of X…” until that thing is widely recognized or able to be mass produced for whatever reasons or reasons.

http://www.humanistictexts.org/sumer.htm#4%20Praise%20of%20Urukagina

 

Introduction

Our oldest written records come from the civilization of Sumer, which arose in around the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers in what is now southern Iraq. The chief cities such as Uruk, Nippur, Ur, and Lagash play a prominent role in the history of the region, being built and destroyed many times over as wars developed between the city states and between them and the surrounding tribes. The Uruk period, 3,750-3150 BCE, saw the emergence of warrior kings, magnificent temples, intensive agriculture by means of irrigation, and the first pictographic writing in 3300 BCE. The early kings gained mythical status,  most notably in the case of Lugualbanda and Gilgamesh, whose myths have survived

Pictographic writing evolved into the cueiform script, made with a reed pressed into soft clay. As clay lasts far longer than vegetable materials, Sumerian cuneiform documents dating as far back as 3100 BCE have been found. A flourishing cuneiform literature in the Sumerian language developed, reaching its peak in the centuries around 2000 BCE. The Sumerian language is not part of the Indo-European group and was replaced in the second millenium by Semitic languages as tribes from the Western deserts and elsewhere moved into the fertile crescent and conquered the area, giving rise to the civilizations of Babylon and Assyria. 

Some insight into Sumerian values can be gained from praise poems written for kings. While the kings may not always live up to this praise they show the type of achievments that they wished to be remembered by. The ones used here to provide characteristic extracts praise Urukagina (Uruinimagina, c 2350) and Gudea (2141-2122), who ruled from Lagash, and Ur-Nammu (2112-2095) and Shulgi (Culgi, 2094-2047), who ruled from Ur. Urukagina appears as a social reformer, getting rid of gross abuses of power that had taken hold in Lagash. He ruled for only eight years, after which the abuses must have returned, because Gudea, a few centuries later, instituted similar reforms. Gudea was also an energetic builder of temples, the most elaborate being at Girsu. The surviving text describing its construction provides insight into the richness of his city state and the dispersed regions from which Sumer acquired resources. As he is not recorded as a constant warrior, many of these materials were probably acquired in trading…