Energy From Thorium Discussion Forum

It is currently Oct 20, 2018 9:37 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 76 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 4:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jan 29, 2014 4:05 am
Posts: 269
Location: Vitoria-ES-Brazil
Russ wrote:
macpacheco wrote:
The good news is you don't need to believe it. Tesla is building cars as fast as possible, doing zero paid ads. There is a well documented phenomena that when a upper middle class hood gets its first Tesla, in the next few years dozens of new orders follow just from word of mouth. The car is soooooo good, most people are hooked with a single test drive from a owner. Owners sell Teslas better than showroom reps. So until all upper middle class hoods get their first Tesla, and a few years go by, demand will continue to sky rocket, even without ads (or your approval).


Where did you get the idea that I am anti-Tesla? I am perfectly willing to consider what they have to offer, given a full-cycle environmental analysis. I noticed, however, that you did not mention anything about the mountains of used batteries that will pile up. Used battery chemicals are a lot nastier than used gasoline engines. And what about mining for all those chemicals in the first place? We need to take it all into account.

I just did a little googling, and I discovered that Tesla buyers get a $7,500 tax credit. Oh yeah, now I see why they are so popular! If people really want these cars so badly, why does the government have to bribe them with my money?

Finally, I am wondering why some people think these cars are so great. Is it because they drive so quietly? I'm just asking, because honestly I can't think of any other advantage they have over conventional cars. Maybe I'll fall in love with the quiet ride as soon as I drive one too -- no way to know until I try it I guess. (But let's not forget that a quiet car can be more dangerous to pedestrians because they are less likely to hear it coming.)


There will be no mountain of batteries piling up on a landfill, they will all be recycled. (They already are being recycled from used cars into stationary storage that Tesla itself will use on their factories and superchargers, when they are truly worn out, then smelting is done).
Used batteries offer raw materials much cheaper than buying new Li/Co/Ni/Al.
Electric motors last a lot more than ICE counterparts.
Tesla has a fixed reduction system instead of a multi speed gearbox.

One of the reasons why Teslas are still expensive is they had to make due with mass produced Li Ion cells, or tiny (for a BEV) cells used in laptops.
This is still true.
But with the Giga Factory, Tesla will be able to build Li Ion cells 100% optimized for cars and for stationary usage (larger and very large size).
They will be able to easily do the smelting recycling themselves.
A lot of Li Ion production costs are per cell.
But when you buy from a market that is 10x larger than your niche one, the overheads are overwhelmed by economies of scale.

Please, go read about the facts of Tesla Motors. Its not hard to find those.
Try: http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/06/how-tesla ... -life.html
(you can skip through most of the beginning of the article which is written for non technical people, but it has the juicy technical reasons why Tesla cars are good for us).

_________________
Looking for companies working to change the world.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 4:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Nov 14, 2013 7:47 pm
Posts: 575
Location: Iowa, USA
Russ wrote:
I just did a little googling, and I discovered that Tesla buyers get a $7,500 tax credit. Oh yeah, now I see why they are so popular! If people really want these cars so badly, why does the government have to bribe them with my money?


I'll pile on... We are giving rich people money to buy cars that they'd likely buy anyway. I'd like a $7500 tax credit to buy a vehicle, it'd pay for half of what I paid for my last one. Then again if I had the government give me "free" money to buy the vehicle I wanted then I'd probably have moved up to something with a V-8 under the hood. We're giving money to rich people so that they can spend it on a luxury item. They don't need an electric sport car. Let them buy a natural gas powered Honda Civic if they want to feel good about their "carbon footprint".

_________________
Disclaimer: I am an engineer but not a nuclear engineer, mechanical engineer, chemical engineer, or industrial engineer. My education included electrical, computer, and software engineering.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 5:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jun 19, 2013 11:49 am
Posts: 1553
macpacheco wrote:
But they know that if they wait another 5 years, then storage will be economical, and it will be cheaper to go off grid than to be enslaved by punitive anti solar tariffs (for a end user perspective) which will be justified from the electricity distributor standpoint.


Just how much storage are you proposing to have in every house?
To go off grid in an all electric society you are going to need something like 50kWh in every house. Even in Arizona
And no, you can't count BEV supplies towards this - since a large part of the day the car will not be available for load sinking.

Even if we get the magical $150/kWh that is supposed to herald the EV era - that is still going to cost some enormous sum of money. Considering the cost of a 25kVA HV/LV distribution transformer is in the hundreds of dollars.

And if for whatever reason the weather doesn't allow major solar production for a couple of days that battery is going to be running pretty low - so you might want an even bigger one. I assume people in Arizona have perfect weather at all times?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 5:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jan 29, 2014 4:05 am
Posts: 269
Location: Vitoria-ES-Brazil
Kurt Sellner wrote:
Russ wrote:
I just did a little googling, and I discovered that Tesla buyers get a $7,500 tax credit. Oh yeah, now I see why they are so popular! If people really want these cars so badly, why does the government have to bribe them with my money?


I'll pile on... We are giving rich people money to buy cars that they'd likely buy anyway. I'd like a $7500 tax credit to buy a vehicle, it'd pay for half of what I paid for my last one. Then again if I had the government give me "free" money to buy the vehicle I wanted then I'd probably have moved up to something with a V-8 under the hood. We're giving money to rich people so that they can spend it on a luxury item. They don't need an electric sport car. Let them buy a natural gas powered Honda Civic if they want to feel good about their "carbon footprint".


You should pile on the cars that cost half as much as a Tesla and get the same credit per unit.
The credit is far less significant for a Tesla than a Volt or a LEAF.

You can pile as high as you want. All you're doing is proving me you don't want a solution. You want to continue destroying the earth with climate change.
A US$ 100k average price Tesla is selling almost as much as the other EVs.
Finally... The environmental damage a Tesla isn't doing to the environment is worth the US$ 7500 (actually much more if you live in CA or CO, and many European countries).

Tesla price increase policy is half inflation. In 5 years Tesla will no longer need any subsidies.
But the other makers, which are doing BEVs just for the ZEV credits will scream, bitch and moan about it.

_________________
Looking for companies working to change the world.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 5:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jan 29, 2014 4:05 am
Posts: 269
Location: Vitoria-ES-Brazil
E Ireland wrote:
macpacheco wrote:
But they know that if they wait another 5 years, then storage will be economical, and it will be cheaper to go off grid than to be enslaved by punitive anti solar tariffs (for a end user perspective) which will be justified from the electricity distributor standpoint.


Just how much storage are you proposing to have in every house?
To go off grid in an all electric society you are going to need something like 50kWh in every house. Even in Arizona
And no, you can't count BEV supplies towards this - since a large part of the day the car will not be available for load sinking.

Even if we get the magical $150/kWh that is supposed to herald the EV era - that is still going to cost some enormous sum of money. Considering the cost of a 25kVA HV/LV distribution transformer is in the hundreds of dollars.

And if for whatever reason the weather doesn't allow major solar production for a couple of days that battery is going to be running pretty low - so you might want an even bigger one. I assume people in Arizona have perfect weather at all times?


Tesla is at $250/kWh today for the Tesla PowerPack sale. Tesla internal costs are already bellow US$ 150/kWh for just the pack of cells.
The mark is $100/kWh, which will be achieved before 2025.
Solar doesn't zero out even in the crappiest rainy day. As long as you don't get frost or snow. Solar for AZ/FL/TX/CA/NM is smart. For IL is stupid.
Rain reduces productivity by perhaps 30%.
How much storage per house... I believe we'll have mini grids of a few dozen houses with one or two tesla PowerPacks (100kWh each). Shared resources are far more efficient than individual ones.

_________________
Looking for companies working to change the world.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 5:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jun 19, 2013 11:49 am
Posts: 1553
Quote:
Tesla is at $250/kWh today for the Tesla PowerPack sale. Tesla internal costs are already bellow US$ 150/kWh for just the pack of cells.

And yet they are charging ~$4000 with install for 10kWh of battery pack.

Quote:
Solar doesn't zero out even in the crappiest rainy day. As long as you don't get frost or snow. Solar for AZ/FL/TX/CA/NM is smart. For IL is stupid.

I take it you have not seen a British summers day :P
But heavy cloud can easily drop solar to something liek 10% of production.
Quote:
Rain reduces productivity by perhaps 30%.

What kind of rain is this? (Remember I am a North European).
Quote:
How much storage per house... I believe we'll have mini grids of a few dozen houses with one or two tesla PowerPacks (100kWh each). Shared resources are far more efficient than individual ones.

So you are going to incur almost all the costs of a grid connection with almost none of the benefits?
The low voltage component (208-400-480-600V) is the expensive AND lossy part.

I just checked something - at the highest insolation point in the US, which is apparently in Arizona, insolation is roughly 7.5kWh/day/m2.
At 30% efficiency, which is optimistic for mass production panels installed on roofs that may not line up to the perfect direction - we are looking at something like 2.25kWh(e)/day/m2
Even if I am charitable and assume there are no seasonal variations - we are going to need 20+ square metres of solar panels once we include drive-aholic American lifestyles in the mix, a significant AC load that runs 24 hours per day and an all electric cooking and hot water fit.
Currently the average Arizona household consumes something like 13,500kWh/year according to the EIA.
Which is.... crazy.

That is 36kWh on the average system per day. Plus driving loads and remaining gas type loads converted to electric.
Which is going to be hard to provide with solar panels, considering there are 65+ days a year with no sunshine in Phoenix.

A grid connection is looking better all the time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 5:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sep 02, 2009 10:24 am
Posts: 511
E Ireland wrote:
That is because capacity is provided by ex-CEGB coal plant that is almost obsolete for actual power production capacity.

That won't continue for a long time.
Even with 3% capital CCGTs will cost far more.


But large scale diesel generators don't cost more, and they can bid in new at £18 / KW / year - presumably on the assumption that they never have to operate.
Quote:
To go off grid in an all electric society you are going to need something like 50kWh in every house. Even in Arizona


You don't have to go off grid. But to cut your imports by 99%, in somewhere like Arizona, you'd need somewhere between 10 and 20 KWh of storage. That's not overly expensive.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 5:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Nov 14, 2013 7:47 pm
Posts: 575
Location: Iowa, USA
macpacheco wrote:
But they know that if they wait another 5 years, then storage will be economical, and it will be cheaper to go off grid than to be enslaved by punitive anti solar tariffs (for a end user perspective) which will be justified from the electricity distributor standpoint.


If what you say is true then the electric utilities as they exist today will no longer exist in ten years. Anything the utilities do to discourage grid tied rooftop solar is moot. Technology marches on and we will see apartment buildings with solar panels over the parking lot and a battery pack in the basement in no time.

Electric storage economics relies on the ability to buy electricity while it is cheap so that it can be sold again at a margin high enough to cover conversion losses, capital and recurring costs, while still providing enough profit to attract investors. In a grid heavy with wind and solar the minute by minute costs of electricity can vary wildly, perhaps even go negative, meaning the utilities will seek customers willing to be paid to consume electricity. One might think that this would be an ideal situation for a battery storage system to become profitable. I disagree and I'll explain why.

There exists a market already for large users of electricity to manage electric demand. One example is a factory I got to tour years ago. They had a painting facility that was idle while I was there. The person giving the tour explained that the electrostatic paint systems, and the furnaces to bake the paint to the large metal items, used so much electricity that the utility cut them a deal so long as they did their painting at night. This is just one example of many on how to manage demand.

Battery storage on a grid scale is exceedingly expensive. You can think that technology will improve this in a decade or less but this still requires someone willing to make the investment in the hope to make a profit. Electricity generation is cheap and easy to do when there are plenty of people willing to buy it at almost any price. An easy way to cash in on negative electricity prices is to open the windows and run the AC or heat.

I read an article on how a large data center purchased their electricity on a contract. Building a power plant is expensive and data centers need electricity to operate. So you have companies like Google and Microsoft that will sign a contract that they will purchase a minimum amount of electricity at a given price or pay a penalty. Well a time came when the penalty was greater than if they burned the electricity. When the utility threatened the data centers with charging the penalty the owner (I forget who exactly, and this has happened more than once) threatened to open up the windows and turn on the heat, just so that they could burn the contractually obligated minimum amount of electricity to avoid the penalty. They also publicized this tactic. The tree huggers got all upset and caused a stir. The utility backed down and made an agreement with the data center on a much lower penalty.

Electricity storage is just bad business. It is just so much cheaper and easier to open up the windows and turn up the heat.

For electricity storage to make sense it must be a fraction of the cost it takes to produce in the first place. Batteries will not do that any time soon. If you maintain that it is possible to do so in five years, or even twenty, then I'd like to know what you are drinking so I can order one too.

_________________
Disclaimer: I am an engineer but not a nuclear engineer, mechanical engineer, chemical engineer, or industrial engineer. My education included electrical, computer, and software engineering.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 5:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jan 29, 2014 4:05 am
Posts: 269
Location: Vitoria-ES-Brazil
E Ireland wrote:
I just checked something - at the highest insolation point in the US, which is apparently in Arizona, insolation is roughly 7.5kWh/day/m2.
At 30% efficiency, which is optimistic for mass production panels installed on roofs that may not line up to the perfect direction - we are looking at something like 2.25kWh(e)/day/m2
Even if I am charitable and assume there are no seasonal variations - we are going to need 20+ square metres of solar panels once we include drive-aholic American lifestyles in the mix, a significant AC load that runs 24 hours per day and an all electric cooking and hot water fit.
Currently the average Arizona household consumes something like 13,500kWh/year according to the EIA.
Which is.... crazy.

That is 36kWh on the average system per day. Plus driving loads and remaining gas type loads converted to electric.
Which is going to be hard to provide with solar panels, considering there are 65+ days a year with no sunshine in Phoenix.

A grid connection is looking better all the time.


In Brazil most people live in vertical condos. Average 10 stories high.
Blanket the ceiling with solar panels, put the PowerPacks at the ground floor where the meters already are.
And have electricity as part of the buildings cost.
Which is perfectly legal here in Brazil (most malls buy wholesale electricity and sell retail to their tenants with exclusivity).
This requires minimal new wiring. And the distance is less than 100 meters of cable.

_________________
Looking for companies working to change the world.


Last edited by macpacheco on Dec 27, 2015 7:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 6:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Nov 14, 2013 7:47 pm
Posts: 575
Location: Iowa, USA
macpacheco wrote:
You can pile as high as you want. All you're doing is proving me you don't want a solution. You want to continue destroying the earth with climate change.

I want a solution that actually works. Solar power and electric cars are not a viable solution, and likely never will be. We have a viable solution already in nuclear fission. In the five years that you claim we could have battery storage that makes solar power viable would could be building nuclear power plants. We could double our nuclear power generating capacity in that time if we wanted to.

Most of a nuclear power plant is concrete, steel, and engineering. We've done that before, we can do it again. The hard part is not physics, or economics, it's government policy. You're solution requires technology that does not exist yet, and may never exist.

We have three choices:
- Status quo, burn fossil fuels
- Nuclear power
- Reverting to horse drawn carriages and cooking over burning cattle dung

You plan is that we rely on future technological advancement to offer a fourth choice. Technology does not always advance at a linear rate. We cannot rely on solar power prices to keep dropping like they have in the past, or battery technology to advance as such either.

Here's a question for you, if all this technology is coming in five years then what do you propose we do until then?

The way you are talking it's sounding like I don't have to do anything. All I need to do is wait for Ford to make a SUV like what I have so when what I'm driving wears out I can just buy a new electric one. When its time to put new shingles on my roof I can just buy solar panels instead. And so on and so forth. Technology marches on without me and in ten years I'll just buy a seat in the bleachers to watch as the last filling station gets bulldozed into rubble.

_________________
Disclaimer: I am an engineer but not a nuclear engineer, mechanical engineer, chemical engineer, or industrial engineer. My education included electrical, computer, and software engineering.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 6:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jun 19, 2013 11:49 am
Posts: 1553
alexterrell wrote:
You don't have to go off grid. But to cut your imports by 99%, in somewhere like Arizona, you'd need somewhere between 10 and 20 KWh of storage. That's not overly expensive.


Even 1% imports will cost something like 30-40% as much as 100% imports.
You will hit hard grid cost limits before then.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 6:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jun 19, 2013 11:49 am
Posts: 1553
macpacheco wrote:
In Brazil most people live in vertical condos. Average 10 stories high.
Blanket the ceiling with solar panels, put the PowerPacks at the ground floor where the meters already are.
And have electricity as part of the buildings cost.
Which is perfectly legal here in Brazil (most malls buy wholesale electricity and sell retail to their tenants with exclusivity).
This requires minimal new wiring. And the distance is less than 100 meters of cable.

There are plenty of solutions. Its crystal clear you're a inside the box guy, E Ireland. You don't innovate. For you the box is a steel wall you can't get out of.


So your panels are going to extend beyond the edge of the roof?
Condos are never going to have the roof space required for everyone to get the power they need.
And exclusive power distribution systems using private wiring are very very illegal in the EU - you have to provide unbundling like on the main grid.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 6:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jan 29, 2014 4:05 am
Posts: 269
Location: Vitoria-ES-Brazil
Kurt Sellner wrote:
macpacheco wrote:
You can pile as high as you want. All you're doing is proving me you don't want a solution. You want to continue destroying the earth with climate change.

I want a solution that actually works. Solar power and electric cars are not a viable solution, and likely never will be. We have a viable solution already in nuclear fission. In the five years that you claim we could have battery storage that makes solar power viable would could be building nuclear power plants. We could double our nuclear power generating capacity in that time if we wanted to.

Most of a nuclear power plant is concrete, steel, and engineering. We've done that before, we can do it again. The hard part is not physics, or economics, it's government policy. You're solution requires technology that does not exist yet, and may never exist.

We have three choices:
- Status quo, burn fossil fuels
- Nuclear power
- Reverting to horse drawn carriages and cooking over burning cattle dung

You plan is that we rely on future technological advancement to offer a fourth choice. Technology does not always advance at a linear rate. We cannot rely on solar power prices to keep dropping like they have in the past, or battery technology to advance as such either.

Here's a question for you, if all this technology is coming in five years then what do you propose we do until then?

The way you are talking it's sounding like I don't have to do anything. All I need to do is wait for Ford to make a SUV like what I have so when what I'm driving wears out I can just buy a new electric one. When its time to put new shingles on my roof I can just buy solar panels instead. And so on and so forth. Technology marches on without me and in ten years I'll just buy a seat in the bleachers to watch as the last filling station gets bulldozed into rubble.


I'm all for building 1TWh worth of nuclear right now.
However the developed world doesn't want to do it. Not my choice. My Brazil claims wants to want nuclear, but since nuclear here is 100% under our corrupt govt control, it looks like we'll be at least 10 years delayed on Angra 3, building a Gen II reactor (which should have been built in the 80s and operating for at least 25 years). There's vague debate about another half a dozen new reactors, but with all of the economic upheavel we're going through, I just don't see that decision taken (and most middle class people are anti nuclear).

The world provides fossil fuels with US$ 5 trillion in yearly subsidies.
In comparison the EV subsidies are tiny.

If we cut those 5 trillion in subsidies and cut all nuclear and renewable subsidies we could have an honest comparison.
Until we do that your "I'll pile on, BEVs are not a solution" is just proof you're biased and don't want to recognize the fact that we'll have a million BEVs on the streets worldwide no latter than 2017, and USA alone will have a million BEVs by 2020.
And from then on production will continue doubling every 2 years.
BEVs can be even 30% more expensive in sticker price than ICE. They cost next to nothing to maintain and electricity will continue to cost half to a quarter to charge vs gasoline. Until Toyota comes up with a 100 mpg Prius (never). The extra cost is offset over 5 years easily.
The challenge is current basic BEVs having 200 miles real world range. That would make demand explode.

But I assume you'll ignore my call to compare BEVs with ICE without subsidies on both sides.
Oh, also, decommission the US Navy 5th fleet parked in the Persian Gulf, which costs far more to the US government than all solar+wind+BEV+fuel cells subsidies.

BEVs are cheap if as a result Saudi Arabia and Iran become poor countries and are forced to abandon their islamism religious lunacy (which combined is the root of most muslim related terrorism in the world).

E Ireland wrote:
So your panels are going to extend beyond the edge of the roof?
Condos are never going to have the roof space required for everyone to get the power they need.
And exclusive power distribution systems using private wiring are very very illegal in the EU - you have to provide unbundling like on the main grid.

The building I live on (upper middle class 5 stories) consumes about 20000kWh/yr. Not far from a single average USA household.
We need about 10% of our roof space to do solar (even with current 18% efficient panels).
A building 3x higher can still do it with surplus space.

_________________
Looking for companies working to change the world.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 7:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3824
Location: Alabama
macpacheco, if you don't lay off the personal threats to those who don't see Tesla as world salvation, you're going to get a time-out on this forum.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Dec 27, 2015 7:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Jan 29, 2014 4:05 am
Posts: 269
Location: Vitoria-ES-Brazil
My apologies.

_________________
Looking for companies working to change the world.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 76 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group