Thread: Katoomba Monthly Temp average set to be SMASHED!!! AGAIN!!!

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

...which pretty much brings it all back to the need for economically viable batteries for household or shared use.......

I think that is the crucial issue, FF; but battery technology is just not there yet.

There may be a ray of hope, though. Porsche have just released an all-electric super car - "Ferraris will chase it.." - and journalists criticised it on the grounds that its hyper performance was hamperred by the weight of the batteries. The CEO responded about the necessary trade off between range and performance, and then stated that it was likely that "solid state batteries would be introduced within 4-5 years and they would take 400 kgs out of the weight of a car...." I know nothing about solid state batteries or their likely economic performance.

Meanwhile we are stuck with existing batteries lead by LiON. But there are three main problems with LiON batteries:

• Cost over their lifetime; they are expensive.
• Safety; they catch fire! Just check the airline safety rules about carrying LiON batteries, and Toyota still use NiMH batteries, on safety grounds.
• Environment. According to the CSIRO only 2% of LiON batteries in Australia are actually recycled, and about 6,500 tons will go to land fill this calendar year.

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

I think that is the crucial issue, FF; but battery technology is just not there yet.
Meanwhile we are stuck with existing batteries lead by LiON. But there are three main problems with LiON batteries:

• Cost over their lifetime; they are expensive.
• Safety; they catch fire! Just check the airline safety rules about carrying LiON batteries, and Toyota still use NiMH batteries, on safety grounds.
• Environment. According to the CSIRO only 2% of LiON batteries in Australia are actually recycled, and about 6,500 tons will go to land fill this calendar year.

Cost - Yes I agree that the technology isn't as economically attractive as we would like it to be, but in a choice between an internationally embarrassing CF PS (or two), and subsidised batteries for the same Govt spend I think I know what would pass the pub test. Certainly there is buyer resistance at their current price, but if discounted by 40% ($5k) there would definitely be vastly increased take-up. They would pay for themselves in 6 years instead of 10 (depending on numbers for the individual) which is far more attractive.

Safety (catching fire) - do we have any stats on Tesla et al batteries catching fire? We're not going to fly them around the country either....

Environment - household batteries are far too big too dump in the bin (yes, I know they are just 100s of Panasonic cells, but disassembling...), and it wouldn't be hard to get some laws into place so that these large batteries are properly recycled (make it part of the purchase package - govt agency collects the battery at the end of life)


Have a look at those Lithium Sulphur batteries. If this link doesn't work then put Monash lithium battery into a search.


My overall point is that whilst batteries still have a way to go, they are usable right now.

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

.....My overall point is that whilst batteries still have a way to go, they are usable right now.

Sorry, FF, but I think you have a bad case of rose coloured glasses. I would love to agree with you, but the economist rationalist in me says.... what about the hard evidence.

Costs: Amortising the costs of a LiON battery unit over "...6 years instead of 10...". would be great if we could be confident that the batteries would last six years. What percentage of LiON drill batteries last six years?

Safety: Two separate responses. First because of the issue of fire, the manufacturers have kept LiON batteries very small - comparable to a "D-type" torch battery. This reduces the scope to scale up production. Simple production costing - easier to produce a smaller number of large items than heaps of little ones. A built in cost inhibiter.

Second, all large scale LiON installations - Teslas, PowerWalls, etc, - have active thermal management sytems to minimise the fire risks. These also are not free. Teslas are rather expensive!

Environment: Anything is possible, but can you imagine ScoMo or dutton organising something like that? The simple facts are:

• 2% of LiON batteries are recycled,
• 98% of lead acid batteries are recycle.

Lithium sulphur batteries. These look promising, but less than 1% of university research ever gets to commercial reality. I cannot go down to Bunnings, Repco or Woollies and buy a LS battery.

FF, I fully agree with your sentiments, but you are a true believer, and I have yet to find the light !

Before everyone starts ripping off heads, I'm aware of (and seen) a growing movement of people who make themselves "power walls".

These things are open source (everything is openly documented), parts are available and an entire community of power nutters are there to help. Parts are 3D printed. Management and temperature circuits are super cheap off AliExpress.

They use 18650 batteries, which can be obtained for $2 : Facebook Marketplace: Lithium ion batteries

(ha! look what just popped up!) and here is a starter kit on Gumtree for $260 = Power Wall starter kit for 18650

This tech is quite open, plus the community is fervent to the point of a religion.

Example of this nutteryness.

Edit - here are his costs, broken right down: https://www.diypowerwalls.com/attachment.php?aid=411


Not that these are an industry solution., but it shows that IF companies like EverGen take off and become plentiful, then having these large solutions on the side of every home is a reality.


The alternative? There is none.

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Mark, I imagine that has swung back t'other way again?

With a vengeance Brett. From nine weeks between mowing (November to February), to probably six days this week. Looks like a park again.

Just to throw in an alternative to battery storage, over the last 8 years I have been running a 4.2 Kw solar array linked to the grid.

I store excess solar electricity in two systems. One is as a booster for my solar hot water and the other is to boost my wood heater powered hydronic heating. Both of these are run by a diverter that only heats the water when there is power to spare.

This is mainly in winter. In summer the air con is on nearly all day. Any excess is fed back to the grid and over the 8 year period this has averaged 1.288 kWh per day. Enougth to run a couple of light bulbs and maybe the TV at night.

So from this you can see that I am using nearly all of my solar electricity. My only regret is that during power failures I have a total blackout.

My average daily power consumption from the grid during this period was 10.65 kWh on top of the 16.38 kWh ave daily solar generation.

To run on batteries I would need at least to triple my solar installation and if I did that the return that I would receive from my feed in power would more than cover the cost of any power that I consumed off the grid. I could not justify batteries on economic grounds as I still have a year to go to cover the cost of my initial installation.

Originally Posted by ian

So a 600 kWh battery (good for powering a "typical" 3 person home for about 40 hours)

Ian, my latest electricity bill lists 15.74 kWh/day as typical three person home consumption. This would equate to ~ 25 kWh/40 hours. Where did the 600 kWh figure come from? Allowing say 70% drawdown as feasible for Li-ion, I would have thought a 40 kWh battery would suffice, an order of magnitude lower?

Looking here (half way down in the bright green section) they say a Tesla Powerwall 2 has 13.5kW usable in the battery, which to me would indicate that that is what you can draw out of it. Whether or not that is enough for most families is unknown (to us, as non-users), but I still don't understand the need to cover 40 hours usage, be it at ~16kW/day or several hundred. There would be a point of diminishing return on a having a battery that covers such long periods, as opposed to drawing some power from the grid occasionally (especially if there are FITs going on as well).

Tesla batteries have a ten year guarantee, which I think works along the lines of diminishing power available over the years.

Originally Posted by Beardy

Do you think the main driving factor is as Bushmiller alluded to that we have topped out with variable supply power and it is now base load that is needed and where the next wave of investment will come when the opportunity arises?

I like the definition of baseload on Wikipedia:

The baseload on a grid is the minimum level of demand on an electrical grid over a span of time, for example, one week. This demand can be met by unvarying power plants, dispatchable generation, or by a collection of smaller intermittent energy sources, depending on which approach has the best mix of low cost, availability and high reliability in any particular market. The remainder of demand, varying throughout a day, is met by dispatchable generation which can be turned up or down quickly, such as load following power plants, peaking power plants, or energy storage.

It seems to me that the demarcation between baseload and dispatchable power is becoming less of a distinction. So, I hope that the focus is not restricted to the traditonal baseload components of the grid for the long term solution. The winning mix may also come from the the dispatchable components on the grid.

Just a comment on batteries. LiFePO4 is now something like 10 years in active use around the world in solar off-grid scenarios and has good cycle life (the killer in this scenario). They are not just available in 18650 format but also in other sizes (eg 38120) and cubic forms and are also coming pre-made into 12v or 24v replacement units to replace your common lead acid car battery. These are a specific chemistry that has been used in deep cycle solar scenarios and are not just your everyday "Li-Ion" that you'd get in your 18650's from China.

Originally Posted by NeilS

It seems to me that the demarcation between baseload and dispatchable power is becoming less of a distinction. So, I hope that the focus is not restricted to the traditonal baseload components of the grid for the long term solution. The winning mix may also come from the the dispatchable components on the grid.

Neil

I had been giving this some thought and I am probably as guilty as any in my perception of exactly what constitutes "baseload" or a "base load station." Your Wikepedia definition nailed "baseload," but a station's role is slightly different and I think you are right in that it is changing, albeit slowly.

If you went back to the turn of the century the stations that delivered the base load tended to be large coal fired power plants. They tended to be large and they tended to be modern. It was simply that the most modern and largest had efficiency and economy of scale on their side. Back in 2000, 34% efficiency was considered good. Today 38% (Millmerran is around that figure) holds that position and there are talks of more modern plants exceeding 40%, although I don't know how many of those are actually around. I just did a search and the most efficient is the John Turk Jr plant in Arkansas: A 665MW ultracritical coal fired at 42%.( America's only ultracritical plant. Australia doesn't have any.)

Today any power plant that can produce cheap power at any time of the day could occupy this position irrespective of size. And there's the rub. For the moment there is nobody that can do this. Wind power can, providing the wind is blowing. You could argue that similar restraints apply to fossil fueled stations too. The rain could bring us undone as WoodPixel so irreverently suggested and restrict coal supply, but in principle that is under our control while the likes of wind and the sun are beyond our control.

Hydro storage and battery storage could meet the requirement of power at any time but fall down on the cost requirement. So for the moment we are back to solving that issue or......doing without .

No, I don't think that is going to be well received. Have a power cut once a year and the country is up in arms about how they had to go without a cooked tea (always happens at tea time: period of high demand that tests the system). One area that has fallen from grace in recent times is the subject of carbon capture. There is a big argument that even if it was possible at an economic rate (and that is impossible for the moment) it could not be scaled up and retrofitted in time to be of use: The damage would have been done.

Millmerran is toying with a carbon capture plant, but it is a toy or a pilot plant if you prefer. Our owners already have carbon capture plants in service, but those too are pilots. This article is a doom and gloom type appraisal of where we are really at, but to my mind it lacks the same factual detail for which we are so critical of the CCDs.

Carbon Capture Tech (NETs) Won't Save Us From Global Warming Extinction - Job One for Humanity

Keep the "solutions" coming.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by poundy

Just a comment on batteries. LiFePO4 is now something like 10 years in active use around the world in solar off-grid scenarios and has good cycle life (the killer in this scenario). They are not just available in 18650 format but also in other sizes (eg 38120) and cubic forms and are also coming pre-made into 12v or 24v replacement units to replace your common lead acid car battery. These are a specific chemistry that has been used in deep cycle solar scenarios and are not just your everyday "Li-Ion" that you'd get in your 18650's from China.

Crikey, they ain't cheap though! Still looking, but $480 for 12v 105aH multiply by minimum 20...is $9600 just for the battery without installation or anything else. You can pay as much as $2158 just for one 12.8v 150aH!

Question: At 240v, is 105 amp hours the same as 25.2 kilowatt hours? (i.e using formula P=VxA, 240x105=25200. If so then that is nearly double the Powerwall storage of 13.5kW.

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

One area that has fallen from grace in recent times is the subject of carbon capture. There is a big argument that even if it was possible at an economic rate (and that is impossible for the moment) it could not be scaled up and retrofitted in time to be of use: The damage would have been done.

From the 11th Feb:

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

The argument is not so much about not burning coal, as not putting CO2 into the atmosphere (nett), so if we still need to burn some coal for heavy industry we should be able to as long as we take back out the quantity of CO2 that has been emitted. It's absolutely not about shutting everything down and then saying "OK, what do we do now?" So if the industries that are putting out CO2 are also (just as an example) investing in Sophia Wang's business (which she said was very easily up-scalable and transportable), then that is the same as buying carbon credits.

This is Sophia Wang's company:
Mineral Carbonation International
(keep in mind that the launch video is now 6-7 years old)

Why you no wissen? (and with thanks to Benny)

Graphene enhanced batteries are apparently arriving now:
YouTube
(vid from 6 days ago)

and his vid on Samsung Graphene battery:
YouTube
(and take note of 3:10)

The producer of that vid is Dagogo Altraide who, judging by the comments, has a lot of cred. I've subscribed to his channel now, and also to notifications from MCi (last post).