Neat breakdown with data + some code.

  • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    It is possible that, not too long in the future, every home could also have a 1 MegaWatt-hour battery. They would be able to capture all the excess solar power generated in a year.

    Braindead strategy, that most likely is discrete fossil fuel shilling, for purposes of making decision inpractical.

    The cost of storage as a baselines is how much you can charge/discharge per day. Bonus for smaller (= cheaper) that can have more discharge/charge than its capacity per day. Plus the resilience/reserve capacity value which is a convenience factor. Resilience alternatives include fire places or gas generators (that are not expected to be used often) which tend to be cheap per kw. But noise, smell, variable costs, and startup effort are all inconveniences. Driving an EV to a public charger can be a similar inconvenience level to a generator for resilience value. If a 1mwh battery is used 10kwh/day it costs 100 times more per kwh than a 10kwh battery.

    OP gives an example of 12kwh summer use (no AC?) which is very high for most people, but can include cooking and floodlights.

    The braindead analysis parts are “because 100 days of 10kwh surpluses happen, I need 1mwh battery”. Actual battery storage requirements are the lowest theoretical winter solar production over 1-2 weeks, together with running pumps for heat (stored mostly in fall) distribution. A 10kwh/day maximum deficit for 1 week straight, with 60 day average deficit of 5kwh/day (without requiring additional heat input), means that any consideration for a large static battery should stop at 70kwh. This is sharply reduced with 1 or 2 EVs where summer surpluses are free fuel, and EV provides backcharging at 3kw whenever needed. 30kwh battery is plenty to charge an EV overnight (300km range for small car) before next day’s sunlight exceeds needs. Even less battery with 2nd lightly used EV, but 30kwh will be cheaper than un-needed EV.

    Instead of relying on batteries for heat generation, which is where $100k 1mwh delusion proposition comes, heat generated from solar stored in under $1/kwh hot water and dirt storage. Outside of winter, this also provides completely unlimited showers and hot tub use, and a $10-20k heat pump and heating system (fossil fuel systems often cost the same) and insulation improvements is the the unquestionable non-distracting path.

    • edent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      53 minutes ago

      (OP here) Sorry mate, are you accusing me of being in the pocket of Big Oil? Here’s everything I’ve written about solar over the last decade - https://shkspr.mobi/blog/tag/solar/ - feel free to point out where I’ve said “yay fossil fuels!”

      I didn’t include AC because that’s not a thing in the UK.

      Oh, and I don’t use electricity for primary heating. Solar thermal is pretty useless in my part of the world because you don’t need much hot water in summer (mmmm! Cold showers!)

      As I said in my post, this is a purely theoretical discussion about what future technology might look like. Your argument is like someone from 2001 going “a recordable CD can hold 650MB - so you only need two for a really long car trip. There’s no way people in the future will have 1TB hard drives! For anything else, just use AM radio.”

      Basically, one of us is braindead - and I’m not so sure it is me!

      • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        24 minutes ago

        Ok, to be polite, you were just mistaken in portraying a 1 mwh battery as a reasonable idea. It is just so absurdly stupid that motives for the proposal need to be looked at. I accept your admission of stupid instead of evil.

    • acchariya@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I looked into one of these thermal systems for my own place but the outlay is just massive for the 11 weeks months a year I really need heat, and the rest of the year it’s just a stupidly oversized hot water heater that is cooking my glycol and DC pumps.

      I ended up paneling up and putting a dumb 9kw resistive boiler for my hydronic floors. The house slab is the battery and although inefficient in terms of strict energy efficiency, winter sun on my cheap pallet of panels dumps plenty into the resistance coils all day. I do have to light the stove if we get a snow storm for a day or two though

      • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Yes. Hydronic flooring is cheap at construction time. Complicated if drilling into finished ceilings/floor with thicker under floor space making. But instead of 9kw of winter electricity you are forced to import, it is free fall surplus generation. 100w of pump circulation.

        But you are saying, a resistive boiler made more sense than a heat pump, with the hydronic floor conversion. At first I thought you were just saying resistive heating electric floor. The latter, to me, would be the cheapest capital outlay conversion, and then a heat pump would beat a resistive boiler on operation costs if hydronic.

        Did you investigate all of these alternatives?

        • acchariya@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          Yeah I already had the hydronic floors and ran numbers on heating the floors off thermal solar panels, propane, heat pump, and the resistive boiler. The thermal panels made the least sense because they are useless eight months of the year.

          The heat pump might have worked but when I really needed it my semi-outdoor closet would be in single digits and full of water supply pipes so the heat pump would be least efficient when I needed it most, and would not help keep the closet warm.

          The resistive boiler meant I could add a bunch of panels to run it during the day and get the floors up to 85F, then run all electric appliances with no worries during the day the rest of the year with the extra capacity. So instead of being net positive generation from 10am to 4pm in summer, its now 8 am to 6pm with way more than I can use at peak.

      • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        That scales down to the home level easily. Box filled with cement dust, dirt, sand, gypsum, gravel is all free material. Water gets more heat lift from heat pumps, but can’t store as much heat in a volume as dirt. Both are highly complimentary, because delivering hot water to everywhere in a home is efficient, quiet, dust free, heat. But if you are lucky enough to have centralized option, that is easier.

        • acchariya@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          It takes an extremely large volume of any of these materials to store any useful amount of heat to get you through a cold night or something. The volume looks more like a room than a box, unless you can somehow make it molten that is

          • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 minutes ago

            I did math for Toronto, Canada. 2000l of hot water was enough (2m3). Winters here have gotten cloudier from great lakes warming. Instead of more water as a buffer, dirt is much more space efficient, and just needs the hot water routed through it to get heat transfer.

            The volume looks more like a room than a box, unless you can somehow make it molten that is

            If hydronic heating system was already being directed towards outer walls instead of straight up from water storage, then a tall “hot dirt” storage, and dual cold water mixing valves (pre and post dirt flow) next to each other, it’s less in additional storage costs per heat unit than water, though it does use more electricity to input heat compared to heat pump.

            No need for temperatures higher than melting/softening point of copper to get useful heat storage for a home. Just water can be enough if you have the room.

        • Dasus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          hot water to everywhere in a home is efficient, quiet

          Have you never lived in an apartment building?

          I don’t know why we haven’t come up with better solutions for piping. Or maybe it’s just because this building was built very cheaply. But anyway… the pipes make quite a loud banging sound if you shut them fast enough. And a lot of whoooshing in the walls just when using hot water.

          • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            High rise apartment buildings have a challenge with pumping water up more than 3-5 floors. This can be solved with intermediate storage on floors, but for high rises, forced air is the usual solution. Heat storage still works well enough with forced air, but water is much better due to internal piping through heat source, where air volume is harder to do there, and if gaining heat from outer shell, then insulation meant to keep heat in is not as good at heat transfer. Water is most perfect heat fluid in world. Air not so much.

            And a lot of whoooshing in the walls just when using hot water.

            This doesn’t apply for heat delivery. Tends to be continuous. A faucet is different.