Olá, Visitante. Por favor entre ou registe-se se ainda não for membro.

Entrar com nome de utilizador, password e duração da sessão
 

Autor Tópico: Musk et al  (Lida 29765 vezes)

555

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 532
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #80 em: 2015-04-27 02:15:43 »
ah ok, mas isso não é geotérmica.
o solo a partir de determinada profundidade está sempre à mesma temperatura.
fazendo passar canalização pelo solo arrefece no verão e aquece no inverno.

L

Chama-se geotermica. Nao a de san meguel nos açures, mas é bom aquece e arrefece a casa, as aguas, o chao, etc. o custo/reward é bom.

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #81 em: 2015-04-27 02:20:30 »
ah ok, mas isso não é geotérmica.
o solo a partir de determinada profundidade está sempre à mesma temperatura.
fazendo passar canalização pelo solo arrefece no verão e aquece no inverno.

L

Chama-se geotermica. Nao a de san meguel nos açures, mas é bom aquece e arrefece a casa, as aguas, o chao, etc. o custo/reward é bom.

pois, pensava que só a de san meguel é que era geotérmica.
já se aprendeu mais alguma coisa.
L
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

555

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 532
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #82 em: 2015-04-27 02:27:08 »
A proposito do backup, nao ha nada como um gerador a gasoleo eheh

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #83 em: 2015-04-27 20:14:02 »
Tesla stock charges ahead on home battery hopes

tesla home battery



Wall Street analysts are bullish about Tesla's upcoming home battery announcement.
After a rough few months, Tesla's stock has finally finished recharging. Shares surged more than 7% Monday thanks to some bullish comments from analysts. And the stock is now up 5% for the year.

It's been a big comeback for Tesla (TSLA), which at one point was down nearly 20% this year due to concerns that low oil prices could hurt sales for its electric cars as well as worries about demand in China.

But analysts at Deutsche Bank and Credit Suisse both put out reports Monday morning touting the stock.
In particular, they believe that investors may not yet realize how much the company's new product -- a battery that can power the home and businesses -- could help Tesla.

Tesla will officially unveil its battery, a so-called stationary storage unit, on Thursday.

Credit Suisse analyst Dan Galves wrote that this new business could wind up eventually adding $35 to $40 a share to Tesla's market value.
Deutsche Bank's Rod Lache was even more optimistic, suggesting that the stationary storage could boost the stock by $100 by 2020.

Tesla is expected to work closely with alternative energy firm SolarCity (SCTY)on this initiative. Tesla CEO Elon Musk is also chairman of SolarCity.

Galves has a price target of $290 for Tesla. That's more than 20% above where it's trading now and is just below the stock's all-time high from last year.
In addition to rising hopes about the new home/business battery, Galves thinks trends in the core car business are looking better as well.
He noted that improvements to its Model S sedan over the past few months should lead to higher order growth for Tesla around the world.

Galves added that since the Model S improvements will be factored into the upcoming Model X crossover vehicles, it will free up Tesla to concentrate more on its Model 3 car. That's the more affordably-priced vehicle that Tesla plans to roll out once its gigafactory is able to produce lithium-ion batteries at a mass scale.
Many analysts believe that the Model 3 is what can catapult Tesla from a niche car maker to one that is truly competitive with the likes of GM (GM), Ford (F), Toyota (TM) and Fiat Chrysler (FCAU).

"We now expect that the Model X will launch at a much higher quality level than the Model S did in 2012 and thus will not require the same level of engineering focus post-launch. This will enable Tesla to move a substantial portion of its engineering focus to the Model 3," Galves wrote.

But the stock remains risky. Shares surged nearly 50% last year after a 335% explosion higher in 2013. Tesla trades at about 475 times 2015 earnings forecasts and 60 times profit estimates for next year.

That valuation is so astronomically high that you'd need one of Elon Musk's SpaceX rockets to reach it.

Analysts now expect losses for the first two quarters of this year and they have sharply reduced their earnings targets for the full year and 2016.
Still, it's worth noting that Tesla's stock has rebounded along with energy prices.

There have been concerns that if gas remains cheap for a long time, that would make average consumers less inclined to consider Tesla's cars.
So even though the new home battery business takes some of the pressure off Tesla's auto sales, the stock could closely mirror commodity prices. If oil heads lower again, there's a decent chance Tesla will follow crude's lead.

cnn
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #84 em: 2015-04-27 20:28:38 »
The (Electric) Revolution is Being Televised
KEN ALLEN, CEO, DHL EXPRESS

May 9 will mark the first time that the inaugural FIA Formula E Championship will bring its electric racing to Europe. Ten teams, including Richard Branson’s Virgin Racing, Leonardo DiCaprio’s Venturi, Andretti FE and Audi Sport ABT, will take to Monaco’s iconic street circuit.

The championship, with six different winners from six different races so far, has already shown that it can deliver thrills and spills for motor racing fans. Formula E CEO Alejandro Agag has also promised that it will help to spark a revolution in electric cars.

Now here are a couple of questions to get you thinking. What do you think the likelihood is that this revolution will take hold? And what do you think the chances are that, at some point, a substantial share of the vehicles on any individual country’s roads will be electric?

Well, you may be surprised to hear that the latter has already happened. What’s more, it was over a hundred years ago. In 1900, electric vehicles accounted for around one third of all vehicles on the roads in the United States. Public interest in electric vehicles at that time was high, particularly for urban driving.

But it was a different revolution – that of the internal combustion engine – which took hold not long after. The commercial genius of Henry Ford and his reliable, highly affordable Model T helped petrol vehicles to take the initiative and triggered a sharp uptake in private car purchases in the US and around the world, effectively laying the foundations of the modern automotive industry.

This essentially short-circuited the development of electric motor technology within the automotive industry.

In recent years, however, interest in electric vehicles has returned, helped by both increased awareness of environmental issues and major improvements in electric technologies that have helped increase performance and bring down costs. Most major vehicle manufacturers are exploring electric or hybrid options, at least as part of their product range, and a number of high profile companies such as Tesla Ventures are making a wholehearted effort to mount an electric challenge to petrol and diesel.

So are we nearing another major turning point in the history of the automotive industry? Can Formula E and the other bold entrepreneurs that are investing in electric vehicle technology inspire a new revolution in transportation?

Despite all the focus on private cars and individual consumers, the logistics industry is arguably the place where the prospects for electric vehicles are thrown into sharpest relief. This is where the economics of the technologies are put to their toughest test, as buyers of vehicles – usually transport companies – look to find the optimal trade-off between operating performance (including various factors such as reliability, speed and load) and total cost (taking into account both the purchase price and the running and maintenance costs over a vehicle’s life-time). The power of branding for buyers of commercial vehicles plays a lesser role (although one manufacturer, and their muscular celebrity ambassador from Brussels, may disagree) and design is only important if it adds to a vehicle’s functionality.

Deutsche Post DHL Group, as the world’s biggest transport company, has committed to improve its carbon efficiency, with the company’s vehicle fleet an important factor. Electric is highly likely to play a big role in that effort, although our positive experience so far has also highlighted some of the major challenges that still hold it back. Range remains a challenge, with electric vehicles still contrasting unfavourably with conventional fuel types for operations over long distances or intense daily delivery schedules. This could be addressed through improvements in charging infrastructure or better battery capacity. In both of these areas, we hope that Formula E will inspire technological change and development. Improvements that the teams will inevitably make to the car batteries will feed into the broader market. And partners of Formula E are working on innovative charging technologies that could significantly broaden the appeal of electric vehicles. Purchase prices are coming down, but the overall costs can still be higher for many types of transport operations. One reason for this could be that many manufacturers are simply adapting their petrol or diesel vehicles to accommodate an electric battery, as opposed to designing vehicles to perform optimally on an electric platform. Despite the challenges, we still share Formula E’s enthusiasm about electric technology. We will increase our electric fleet by at least 500 vehicles in 2015, and we acquired a company last year that produces an electric vehicle (the StreetScooter) specifically to meet our delivery requirements in cities.

Formula E is not just showcasing the capabilities of the latest generation of high performance electric cars. It is also building on its mass market appeal and its commercial partnerships to support other platforms and projects to promote electric technology. The FE School Series, with the support of UK-based charity Greenpower, invites schools at race locations to build and race with their own electric race car, promoting sustainable engineering and technology among future generations. The DHL Blue Sky Transport Design Award, which will close on April 30, invites aspiring designers to propose a transport solution based on electric technology that will help to create a more sustainable world. A jury including leading design, creative and business figures and representatives of Formula E and Andretti FE will select a winner at the DHL Formula E Berlin ePrix on May 23, and the winning prototype will be presented at the final Formula E race of the season in London in June.

Whether a real revolution is underway that will pose a serious threat to conventional fuel technologies is still an open question. And we are still a long way from the days when 30% of vehicles were electric. However, anyone who has watched a Formula E race to date will be under no doubt about this: the race to the future is well and truly on, and that future is going to be more electric than ever before.



fonte
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #85 em: 2015-04-27 20:37:54 »
Long Beach eprix

Sensational Long Beach ePrix highlights


isto vai ser giro...

canal da formula e no youtube

L
« Última modificação: 2015-04-27 20:40:10 por Lark »
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Mystery

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 1562
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #86 em: 2015-04-27 22:07:55 »
a Isle of Man tem a TT Zero há uns bons anos

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRWp9rhfS_0
A fool with a tool is still a fool.

Messiah

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 2631
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Musk et al
« Responder #87 em: 2015-04-29 05:52:28 »
O que está na berra agora é geotermia

Isso eh bom aqui nos EUA ha imensos tipos com isso mas atencao nao eh para todos os climas.

Esses sistemas geotermicos teem uma eficiencia de 1:3 ou seja 1 unidade de input de energia para obter 3 unidades. No entanto em climas mais extremos, nao eh suficiente... tipo zonas com muito frio precisam ser complementadas com aquecimento a gas ou electrico.

Penso que a partir dos -10C ou la o que eh comeca a nao ter capacidade de manter a casa quente e precisa de um backup.

Uma coisa que me faz confusao aqui nos States sao os cilindros para a agua quente em vez de usarem esquentadores/caldeiras. Porque desperdicar a energia da agua que esta ali a perder energia em vez de utilizar on demand? Sobretudo em zonas frias onde o delta entre a temperatura da agua e o exterior eh mt maior (a maioria dos cilindros encontram-se em caves ou no chamado crawlspace ou sotaos que nao estao isolados)

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #88 em: 2015-04-30 09:00:56 »
Musk Plots Energy Storage Fix Where Utility Industry Failed

Battery Revolution: The Future of Energy Storage

Billionaire Elon Musk thinks he can pave the way to a better energy future by turning the mattress-shaped batteries in Tesla’s electric car into upright pillars so they can be used to power homes, businesses and even utilities.

Musk will lift the veil Thursday (hoje) on a new generation of batteries designed to store growing volumes of solar and wind energy. If he gets it right, Tesla Motors Inc. will have spun a significant second business off the technology originally designed for its electric vehicles -- and will gain a toehold in a business projected to generate tens of billions of dollars in a decade.

Nobody in the power industry has yet been able to come up with a cost-effective way to store large volumes of energy for later distribution. Tesla is making a bet that its huge $5 billion “gigafactory” currently under construction near Reno, Nevada, will enable the mass production needed to drive down the cost of batteries and make them competitive for a broad range of customers, including traditional suppliers of electricity.

Tesla has scheduled an event Thursday at its design studio in Hawthorne, California, to announce both a Tesla home battery and what it called last week in a note to investors “a very large utility-scale battery.”

Eagerly Awaiting

“Whatever Tesla announces on Thursday is just the beginning,” said Peter Rosegg, spokesman for Hawaiian Electric Co., where 12 percent of the utility’s customers have rooftop solar panels. “Tesla doesn’t have to go after the market -- the market will come to them. We’re very eager to see what they have to say.”

Tesla, based in Palo Alto, California, has its eye on a business that’s poised for tremendous growth. As homes, businesses and utilities use more renewable energy generated by sunshine and wind, the need to provide reliable power grows. Batteries can be used to store electricity during peak production times, and then dispense it later when the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing.

Musk tweeted a teaser about the Thursday announcement: “For the future to be good, we need electric transport, solar power and (of course) ... the missing piece,” he posted on Twitter Tuesday. Tesla rose 0.9 percent to $232.45 at the close in New York.

Global Growth

A January report from Navigant Research estimates that worldwide revenue from grid-scale energy storage may exceed $68 billion by 2024 as renewable resources multiply and electricity grid operators seek to balance the mix of generation assets.

Tesla is already supplying batteries to homes and commercial businesses such as Wal-Mart Stores Inc. through pilot projects and a supply agreement with SolarCity Corp., a relationship that generated $2.7 million in revenue for Tesla in 2014, according to a recent regulatory filing. That’s less than 1/10 of 1 percent of the automaker’s total for last year.

But Tesla is thinking much bigger, saying in job postings that its energy-storage business will soon grow to billions in sales. Musk plans to combine the strengths of the company’s patented lithium-ion batteries, which currently can run a car for about 265 miles (426 kilometers) a charge, with its expertise in power management software.

Green Trio

Musk’s green power ambitions involve three inter-connected enterprises: SolarCity, where he serves as chairman, the battery factory in Nevada, and the Tesla car business. With the move into energy storage, Tesla can help green the grid that fuels its cars while offering solar customers a way to store any excess electricity in batteries for use during hours of less sunlight and greater demand.

An even larger potential market will be utilities that have traditionally generated power with coal and natural gas.
“Tesla isn’t just going to sell batteries to SolarCity,” said Ben Kallo, an analyst with Robert W. Baird & Co. “They are going to sell to project developers, wind and solar developers, and directly to utilities. The residential product isn’t going to be a huge needle mover in the near term, but the numbers are very big on the utility side.”

Tesla will face competition from other battery makers such as Korea’s LG Chem Ltd., legacy U.S. power providers such as AES Corp. and startups such as JLM Energy Inc. It will have to navigate regulatory hurdles in a state-by-state market with varying degrees of subsidies and incentives for the technology.

Moving Slowly

Utilities, cautious by nature, have been slow to adopt storage on their own.
“Storage doesn’t neatly fit into transmission, distribution or generation categories so it can be tough for utilities to justify investing in storage projects,” said Brian Warshay, an analyst for Bloomberg New Energy Finance. “Some utilities, like the California investor-owned companies, are getting into storage because their regulator basically told them they have to.”

In Tesla’s home state, a groundbreaking energy-storage mandate requires PG&E Corp., Edison International’s Southern California Edison and Sempra Energy’s San Diego Gas & Electric to collectively buy 1.3 gigawatts of energy storage capacity by the end of 2020. New York is also pushing utilities to use storage to relieve congestion on transmission lines and plans for the potential retirement of the Indian Point nuclear power plant. Entergy Corp., owner of Indian Point, is applying for a federal license to keep its reactors open through the end of the next decade.

Utilities in California and New York are potential customers for Tesla. The automaker also has been in talks to provide its batteries to Oncor Electric Delivery Co., the largest power-line owner in Texas.

“Batteries really are kind of a panacea for the grid,” said Don Clevenger, senior vice president of strategic planning for Oncor. “They provide better reliability.”

bloomberg
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Incognitus

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 30961
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #89 em: 2015-04-30 11:59:10 »
Já existem muitas soluções do género tanto para escalas grandes como pequenas. Até da Panasonic (fornecedor da Tesla).

Não quer dizer que exista um grande mercado. Na grid a atracção para esses produtos é maior mas o produto da Tesla tendencialmente será menos competitivo. Existe incentivo para investir em grid storage na forma de lucro. Fora da grid storage o maior incentivo deverão ser subsídios -- que a Tesla se apresta a mamar em grande escala na Califórnia.
"Nem tudo o que pode ser contado conta, e nem tudo o que conta pode ser contado.", Albert Einstein

Incognitus, www.thinkfn.com

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #90 em: 2015-04-30 15:44:56 »
subsídios -- que a Tesla se apresta a mamar em grande escala na Califórnia.

até agora os tão criticados subsídios foram um exemplo do que deve ser subsidiado.
os custos da fotovoltaica caiem a pique e em breve serão os mais baixos de todas as formas de produção de electricidade.
neste momento não precisam já de subsídios para serem competititvas.
a califórnia mantem-os dada a crise ambiental em que se encontra. em breve ficarão sem hídrica.
e também porque sempre foi o estado mais avançado no combate à poluição e climate change.

não percebo essa antipatia ao Musk que já tinha notado noutros sítios conservadores/libertários da américa. algo semelhante se passou com o jobs. e com o warren buffet estranhamente. e com o jeff bezos.

é porque são verdadeiros capitães da indústria? porque mostram aos outros como inovar a sério e ganhar dinheiro com isso, não estando presos ao lucro pelo lucro?
é porque apostam em tecnologias disruptoras contra as quais os conservadores são naturalmente contra?
Precisamente porque são conservadores e não gostam de inovação?
é porque o Musk quer ir a Marte? e também isso incomoda as mentes conservadoras?
é porque são o exemplo vivo do que o capitalismo devia ser?
Verdadeiramente empreendedor e representativo do espírito de aventura a da insaciável curiosidade humana?
Não baseado na ganância e na avareza, na fraude e em tudo o que sendo intrinsicamente mau, querem fazer passar por bom?
Porque são extremamente inteligentes e os conservadores dão-se mal com a intelectualidade?

Seja pelo que for. Eu admiro o homem. E o facto de se aproveitar de subsídios que são feitos precisamente para isso, para serem aproveitados não belisca nem um bocadinho a sua integridade. Se ele ligasse ao dinheiro tinha-se reformado com o dinheiro da PayPal. Não enterrava tudo o que tinha e o que não tinha na Tesla. E agora na spaceX.
que deve ser mais um factor de ódio dos conservadores por ele. Ousar ir contra os monstros do complexo militar-industrial, Lockheed e Boeing e ganhar-lhes no seu próprio terreno. Isso nunca lhe perdoarão. E não descansarão enquanto não o virem falido. O que pode bem acontecer.

Mas até lá vou ficar aqui deste lado a torcer por ele.

L
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #91 em: 2015-04-30 16:23:37 »
Porque são extremamente inteligentes e os conservadores dão-se mal com a intelectualidade?


Um artigo exemplificativo da aversão dos conservadores pela intectualidade:

Smarter than Thou
Neil deGrasse Tyson and America’s nerd problem

‘My great fear,” Neil deGrasse Tyson told MSNBC’s Chris Hayes in early June, “is that we’ve in fact been visited by intelligent aliens but they chose not to make contact, on the conclusion that there’s no sign of intelligent life on Earth.”

In response to this rather standard little saw, Hayes laughed as if he had been trying marijuana for the first time. All told, one suspects that Tyson was not including either himself or a fellow traveler such as Hayes as inhabitants of Earth, but was instead referring to everybody who is not in their coterie. That, alas, is his way. An astrophysicist and evangelist for science, Tyson currently plays three roles in our society: He is the director of the Hayden Planetarium at the New York Science Museum; the presenter of the hip new show Cosmos; and, most important of all perhaps — albeit through no distinct fault of his own — he is the fetish and totem of the extraordinarily puffed-up “nerd” culture that has of late started to bloom across the United States.

One part insecure hipsterism, one part unwarranted condescension, the two defining characteristics of self-professed nerds are (a) the belief that one can discover all of the secrets of human experience through differential equations and (b) the unlovely tendency to presume themselves to be smarter than everybody else in the world. Prominent examples include MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry, Rachel Maddow, Steve Kornacki, and Chris Hayes; Vox’s Ezra Klein, Dylan Matthews, and Matt Yglesias; the sabermetrician Nate Silver; the economist Paul Krugman; the atheist Richard Dawkins; former vice president Al Gore; celebrity scientist Bill Nye; and, really, anybody who conforms to the Left’s social and moral precepts while wearing glasses and babbling about statistics.

The pose is, of course, little more than a ruse — our professional “nerds” being, like Mrs. Doubtfire, stereotypical facsimiles of the real thing. They have the patois but not the passion; the clothes but not the style; the posture but not the imprimatur. Theirs is the nerd-dom of Star Wars, not Star Trek; of Mario Kart and not World of Warcraft; of the latest X-Men movie rather than the comics themselves. A sketch from the TV show Portlandia, mocked up as a public-service announcement, makes this point brutally. After a gorgeous young woman explains at a bar that she doesn’t think her job as a model is “her thing” and instead identifies as “a nerd” who is “into video games and comic books and stuff,” a dorky-looking man gets up and confesses that he is, in fact, a “real” nerd — someone who wears glasses “to see,” who is “shy,” and who “isn’t wearing a nerd costume for Halloween” but is dressed how he lives.

“I get sick with fear talking to people,” he says. “It sucks.” A quick search of the Web reveals that Portlandia’s writers are not the only people to have noticed the trend. “Science and ‘geeky’ subjects,” the pop-culture writer Maddox observes, “are perceived as being hip, cool and intellectual.” And so people who are, or wish to be, hip, cool, and intellectual “glom onto these labels and call themselves ‘geeks’ or ‘nerds’ every chance they get.” Which is to say that the nerds of MSNBC and beyond are not actually nerds — with scientific training and all that it entails — but the popular kids indulging in a fad. To a person, they are attractive, accomplished, well paid, and loved, listened to, and cited by a good portion of the general public.

Most of them spend their time on television speaking fluently, debating with passion, and hanging out with celebrities. They attend dinner parties and glitzy social events, and are photographed and put into the glossy magazines. They are flown first class to university commencement speeches and late-night shows and book launches. There they pay lip service to the notion that they are not wildly privileged, and then go back to their hotels to drink $16 cocktails with Bill Maher. In this manner has a word with a formerly useful meaning been turned into a transparent humblebrag: Look at me, I’m smart. Or, more important, perhaps, Look at me and let me tell you who I am not, which is southern, politically conservative, culturally traditional, religious in some sense, patriotic, driven by principle rather than the pivot tables of Microsoft Excel, and in any way attached to the past.

“Nerd” has become a calling a card — a means of conveying membership of one group and denying affiliation with another. The movement’s king, Neil deGrasse Tyson, has formal scientific training, certainly, as do the handful of others who have become celebrated by the crowd. He is a smart man who has done some important work in popularizing science. But this is not why he is useful. Instead, he is useful because he can be deployed as a cudgel and an emblem in political argument — pointed to as the sort of person who wouldn’t vote for Ted Cruz.

“Ignorance,” a popular Tyson meme holds, “is a virus. Once it starts spreading, it can only be cured by reason. For the sake of humanity, we must be that cure.” This rather unspecific message is a call to arms, aimed at those who believe wholeheartedly they are included in the elect “we.” Thus do we see unexceptional liberal-arts students lecturing other people about things they don’t understand themselves and terming the dissenters “flat-earthers.” Thus do we see people who have never in their lives read a single academic paper clinging to the mantle of “science” as might Albert Einstein.

Thus do we see residents of Brooklyn who are unable to tell you at what temperature water boils rolling their eyes at Bjørn Lomborg or Roger Pielke Jr. because he disagrees with Harry Reid on climate change. Really, the only thing in these people’s lives that is peer-reviewed are their opinions. Don’t have a Reddit account? Believe in God? Skeptical about the threat of overpopulation? Who are you, Sarah Palin? First and foremost, then, “nerd” has become a political designation. It is no accident that the president has felt it necessary to inject himself into the game: That’s where the cool kids are. Answering a question about Obama’s cameo on Cosmos, Tyson was laconic. “That was their choice,” he told Grantland. “We didn’t ask them. We didn’t have anything to say about it.

They asked us, ‘Do you mind if we intro your show?’ Can’t say no to the president. So he did.” One wonders how easy it would have proved to say “No” to the president if he had been, say, Scott Walker. Either way, though, that Obama wished to associate himself with the project is instructive. He was launched into the limelight by precisely the sort of people who have DVR’d every episode of Cosmos and who, like the editors of Salon, see it primarily as a means by which they might tweak their ideological enemies; who, as apparently does Sean McElwee, see the world in terms of “Neil deGrasse Tyson vs. the Right (Cosmos, Christians, and the Battle for American Science)”; and who, like the folks at Vice, advise us all: “Don’t Get Neil deGrasse Tyson Started About the Un-Science-y Politicians Who Are Killing America’s Dreams.

” Obama knows this. Look back to his earlier backers and you will see a pattern. These are the people who insisted until they were blue in the face that George W. Bush was a “theocrat” eternally hostile toward “evidence,” and that, despite all information to the contrary, Attorney General Ashcroft had covered up the Spirit of Justice statue at the Department of Justice because he was a prude. These are the people who will explain to other human beings without any irony that they are part of the “reality-based community,” and who want you to know how aw-shucks excited they are to look through the new jobs numbers. At no time is the juxtaposition between the claim and the reality more clear than during the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, which ritzy and opulent celebration of wealth, influence, and power the nation’s smarter progressive class has taken to labeling the “Nerd Prom.” It is clear why people who believe themselves to be providing a voice for the powerless and who routinely lecture the rest of us about the evils of income inequality would wish to reduce in stature a party that would have made Trimalchio blush: It is devastating to their image.

Just as Hillary Clinton has noticed of late that her extraordinary wealth and ostentatious lifestyle conflict with her populist mien, the New Class recognizes the danger that its private behavior poses to its public credibility. There is, naturally, something a little off about selected members of the Fifth Estate yukking it up with those whom they have been charged with scrutinizing — all while rappers and movie stars enjoy castles of champagne and show off their million-dollar dresses. And so the optics must be addressed and the nomenclature of an uncelebrated group cynically appropriated. We’re not the ruling class, the message goes. We’re just geeks. We’re not the powerful; we’re the outcasts. This isn’t a big old shindig; it’s science. Look, Neil deGrasse Tyson is standing in the Roosevelt Room! * * * Ironically enough, what Tyson and his acolytes have ended up doing is blurring the lines between politics, scholarship, and culture — thereby damaging all three. Tyson himself has expressed bemusement that “entertainment reporters” have been so interested in him.

“What does it mean,” he asked, “that Seth MacFarlane, who’s best known for his fart jokes — what does it mean that he’s executive producing” Cosmos? Well, what it means is that, professionally, Tyson has hit the jackpot. Actual science is slow, unsexy, and assiduously neutral — and it carries about it almost nothing that would interest either the hipsters of Ann Arbor or the Kardashian-soaked titillaters over at E! Politics pretending to be science, on the other hand, is current, and it is chic. It’s useful, too. For all of the hype, much of the fadlike fetishization of “Big Data” is merely the latest repackaging of old and tired progressive ideas about who in our society should enjoy the most political power.

Outside of our laboratories, “it’s just science!” is typically a dodge — a bullying tactic designed to hide a crushingly boring orthodox progressivism behind the veil of dispassionate empiricism and to pretend that Hayek’s observation that even the smartest of central planners can never have the information they would need to centrally plan was obviated by the invention of the computer. If politics should be determined by pragmatism, and the pragmatists are all on the left . . . well, you do the math. All over the Internet, Neil deGrasse Tyson’s face is presented next to words that he may or may not have spoken. “Other than being a scientist,” he says in one image, “I’m not any other kind of -ist. These -ists and -isms are philosophies; they’re philosophical portfolios that people attach themselves to and then the philosophy does the thinking for you instead of you doing the thinking yourself.”

Translation: All of my political and moral judgments are original, unlike those of the rubes who subscribe to ideologies, philosophies, and religious frameworks. My worldview is driven only by the data. This is nonsense. Progressives not only believe all sorts of unscientific things — that Medicaid, the VA, and Head Start work; that school choice does not; that abortion carries with it few important medical questions; that GM crops make the world worse; that one can attribute every hurricane, wildfire, and heat wave to “climate change”; that it’s feasible that renewable energy will take over from fossil fuels anytime soon — but also do their level best to block investigation into any area that they consider too delicate.

You’ll note that the typical objections to the likes of Charles Murray and Paul McHugh aren’t scientific at all, but amount to asking lamely why anybody would say something so mean. Still, even were they paragons of inquiry, the instinct would remain insidious. The scientific process is an incredible thing, but it provides us with information rather than with ready-made political or moral judgments. Anyone who privileges one value over another (liberty over security, property rights over redistribution) is by definition indulging an “-ism.” Anyone who believes that the Declaration of Independence contains “self-evident truths” is signing on to an “ideology.” Anyone who goes to bat for any form of legal or material equality is expressing the end results of a philosophy.

Perhaps the greatest trick the Left ever managed to play was to successfully sell the ancient and ubiquitous ideas of collectivism, lightly checked political power, and a permanent technocratic class as being “new,” and the radical notions of individual liberty, limited government, and distributed power as being “reactionary.” A century ago, Woodrow Wilson complained that the checks and balances instituted by the Founders were outdated because they had been contrived before the telephone was invented.

Now, we are to be liberated by the microchip and the Large Hadron Collider, and we are to have our progress assured by ostensibly disinterested analysts. I would recommend that we not fall for it. Our technology may be sparkling and our scientists may be the best in the world, but our politics are as they ever were. Marie Antoinette is no more welcome in America if she dresses up in a Battlestar Galactica uniform and self-deprecatingly joins Tumblr. Sorry, America. Science is important. But these are not the nerds you’re looking for.

fonte
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #92 em: 2015-04-30 16:26:23 »
um exemplo horripilante do ódio conservador pela intelectualidade.
um ataque incompreensível ao Neil DeGrasse Tyson.

e a national review não é um pasquim qualquer. É um baluarte do pensamento conservador da américa.
seria fascinante se não fosse tão constrangedor.

L
« Última modificação: 2015-04-30 16:33:16 por Lark »
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Incognitus

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 30961
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #93 em: 2015-04-30 17:05:34 »
subsídios -- que a Tesla se apresta a mamar em grande escala na Califórnia.

até agora os tão criticados subsídios foram um exemplo do que deve ser subsidiado.
os custos da fotovoltaica caiem a pique e em breve serão os mais baixos de todas as formas de produção de electricidade.
neste momento não precisam já de subsídios para serem competititvas.
a califórnia mantem-os dada a crise ambiental em que se encontra. em breve ficarão sem hídrica.
e também porque sempre foi o estado mais avançado no combate à poluição e climate change.

não percebo essa antipatia ao Musk que já tinha notado noutros sítios conservadores/libertários da américa. algo semelhante se passou com o jobs. e com o warren buffet estranhamente. e com o jeff bezos.

é porque são verdadeiros capitães da indústria? porque mostram aos outros como inovar a sério e ganhar dinheiro com isso, não estando presos ao lucro pelo lucro?
é porque apostam em tecnologias disruptoras contra as quais os conservadores são naturalmente contra?
Precisamente porque são conservadores e não gostam de inovação?
é porque o Musk quer ir a Marte? e também isso incomoda as mentes conservadoras?
é porque são o exemplo vivo do que o capitalismo devia ser?
Verdadeiramente empreendedor e representativo do espírito de aventura a da insaciável curiosidade humana?
Não baseado na ganância e na avareza, na fraude e em tudo o que sendo intrinsicamente mau, querem fazer passar por bom?
Porque são extremamente inteligentes e os conservadores dão-se mal com a intelectualidade?

Seja pelo que for. Eu admiro o homem. E o facto de se aproveitar de subsídios que são feitos precisamente para isso, para serem aproveitados não belisca nem um bocadinho a sua integridade. Se ele ligasse ao dinheiro tinha-se reformado com o dinheiro da PayPal. Não enterrava tudo o que tinha e o que não tinha na Tesla. E agora na spaceX.
que deve ser mais um factor de ódio dos conservadores por ele. Ousar ir contra os monstros do complexo militar-industrial, Lockheed e Boeing e ganhar-lhes no seu próprio terreno. Isso nunca lhe perdoarão. E não descansarão enquanto não o virem falido. O que pode bem acontecer.

Mas até lá vou ficar aqui deste lado a torcer por ele.

L

Os custos da energia solar implodiram devido a uma brutal sobrecapacidade no sector. Sobreviveram quase só produtoras Chinesas, excepto a FSLR (as outras, mesmo Ocidentais, fabricam na China).

Os subsídios de que falo são diferentes, porém. E demasiado agressivos (grandes, versus o preço do produto). E não levam a uma grande queda do seu custo porque não é a TSLA a inovar nisso, a TSLA apenas junta as baterias num pack.

------

Eu não tenho antipatia nenhuma ao Musk, só acho:
* Que o esquema das trocas de baterias é próximo de fraudulento;
* Que a TSLA é uma bolha promovida pelo establishment financeiro e tem elevada probabilidade de acabar mal, não obstante os carros serem bons e terem avançado bastante a causa dos EVs.
« Última modificação: 2015-04-30 17:07:18 por Incognitus »
"Nem tudo o que pode ser contado conta, e nem tudo o que conta pode ser contado.", Albert Einstein

Incognitus, www.thinkfn.com

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #94 em: 2015-05-01 20:51:53 »
Late Thursday, the glitzy electric car company Tesla Motors, run by billionaire Elon Musk, ceased to be just a car company. As was widely expected, Tesla announced that it is offering a home battery product, which people can use to store energy from their solar panels or to backstop their homes against blackouts, and also larger scale versions that could perform similar roles for companies or even parts of the grid.

For homeowners, the Tesla Powerwall will have a power capacity of either 10 kilowatt hours or 7 kilowatt hours, at a cost of either $ 3,500 or $ 3,000. The company says these are the costs for suppliers and don’t include the cost of installation and a power inverter, so customers could pay considerably more than that.

The battery, says Tesla, “increases the capacity for a household’s solar consumption, while also offering backup functionality during grid outages.” At the same time, the company said it will producing larger batteries for businesses and utility companies — listing projects with Texas-based Oncor and Southern California Edison.

The anticipation leading up to this announcement has been intense — words like “zeitgeist” are being used — which itself is one reason why the moment for “energy storage,” as energy wonks put it to describe batteries and other technologies that save energy for later use, may finally be arriving. Prices for batteries have already been dropping, but if Tesla adds a “coolness factor” to the equation, people might even be willing to stretch their finances to buy one.

The truth, though, is Tesla isn’t the only company in the battery game, and whatever happens with Tesla, this market is expected to grow. A study by GTM Research and the Energy Storage Association earlier this year found that while storage remains relatively niche — the market was sized at just $128 million in 2014 — it also grew 40 percent last year, and three times as many installations are expected this year.

By 2019, GTM Research forecasts, the overall market will have reached a size of $ 1.5 billion.

“The trend is more and more players being interested in the storage market,” says GTM Research’s Ravi Manghani. Tesla, he says, has two unique advantages — it is building a massive battery-making “gigafactory” which should drive down prices, and it is partnered with solar installer Solar City (Musk is Solar City’s chairman), which “gives Tesla access to a bigger pool of customers, both residential and commercial, who are looking to deploy storage with or without solar.”

The major upshot of more and cheaper batteries and much more widespread energy storage could, in the long term, be a true energy revolution — as well as a much greener planet. Here are just a few ways that storage can dramatically change — and green — the way we get power:

1. Helping to integrate more renewables onto the grid.

Almost everybody focusing the Tesla story has homed in on home batteries – but in truth, the biggest impact of storage could occur at the level of the electricity grid as a whole. Indeed, GTM Research’s survey of the storage market found that 90 percent of deployments are currently at the utility scale, rather than in homes and businesses.

That’s probably just the beginning: A late 2014 study by the Brattle Group, prepared for mega-Texas utility Oncor, found that energy storage “appears to be on the verge of becoming quite economically attractive” and that the benefits of deploying storage across Texas would “significantly exceed costs” thanks to improved energy grid reliability. Oncor has proposed spending as much as $ 5.2 billion on storage investments in the state. California, too, has directed state utilities to start developing storage capacity – for specifically environmental reasons.

For more power storage doesn’t just hold out the promise of a more reliable grid — it means one that can rely less on fossil fuels and more on renewable energy sources like wind and, especially, solar, which vary based on the time of day or the weather. Or as a 2013 Department of Energy report put it, “storage can ‘smooth’ the delivery of power generated from wind and solar technologies, in effect, increasing the value of renewable power.”

“Storage is a game changer,” said Tom Kimbis, vice president of executive affairs at the Solar Energy Industries Association, in a statement. That’s for many reasons, according to Kimbis, but one of them is that “grid-tied storage helps system operators manage shifting peak loads, renewable integration, and grid operations.” (In fairness, the wind industry questions how much storage will be needed to add more wind onto the grid.)

Consider how this might work using the example of California, a state that currently ramps up natural gas plants when power demand increases at peak times, explains Gavin Purchas, head of the Environmental Defense Fund’s California clean energy program.

In California, “renewable energy creates a load of energy in the day, then it drops off in the evening, and that leaves you with a big gap that you need to fill,” says Purchas. “If you had a plenitude of storage devices, way down the road, then you essentially would be able to charge up those storage devices during the day, and then dispatch them during the night, when the sun goes down. Essentially it allows you to defer when the solar power is used.”

This will be appealing to power companies, notes Purchas, because “gas is very quick to respond, but it’s not anywhere near as quick as battery, which can be done in seconds, as opposed to minutes with gas.” The consequences of adding large amounts of storage to the grid, then, could be not only a lot fewer greenhouse gas emissions, but also better performance.

2. Greening suburban homes and, maybe, their electric cars, too.

 
Shifting away from the grid to the home, batteries or other forms of storage have an equally profound potential, especially when paired with rooftop solar panels.

Currently, rooftop solar users are able to draw power during the day and, under net metering arrangements, return some of it to the grid and thus lower their bills. This has led to a great boom in individual solar installations, but there’s the same problem here as there is with the grid as a whole: Solar tapers off with the sun, but you still need a lot of power throughout the evening and overnight.

But storing excess solar power with batteries, and then switching them on once the solar panels stop drawing from the sun, makes a dramatic difference. Homes could shift even further away from reliance on the grid, while also using much more green power.

Moreover, they’d also be using it at a time of day when its environmental impact is greater. “If you think about solar, when it’s producing in the middle of the day, the environmental footprint is relatively modest,” explains Dartmouth College business professor Erin Mansur. That’s because at this time of day, Mansur explains, solar is more likely to be displacing electricity generated from less carbon intensive natural gas. “But if you can shift some of that to the evening … if you can save some to the middle of the night, it’s more likely to be displacing coal,” says Mansur.

Some day, perhaps, some of the sun-sourced and power could even be widely used to recharge electric vehicles like Teslas — which would solve another problem. According to a much discussed 2012 paper by Mansur and two colleagues, electric vehicles can have a surprisingly high energy footprint despite their lack of tailpipe emissions because they are often charged over night, a time when the power provided to the grid (said to be “on the margin”) often comes from coal.

But if electric vehicles could be charged overnight using stored power from the sun, that problem also goes away.

All of which contributes to a larger vision outlined recently by a team of researchers at the University of California at Los Angeles’s Institute of the Environment and Sustainability in which suburban homeowners, who can install rooftop solar combined with batteries and drive electric vehicles, start to dramatically reduce their carbon footprints — which have long tended to be bigger in suburbia, due in part to the need for long commutes — and also their home energy bills.

Granted, it’s still a vision right now, rather than a reality for the overwhelming number of suburbanites — but energy storage is a key part of that vision.

3. Helping adjust to smart energy pricing

And there’s another factor to add into the equation, which shows how energy storage could further help homeowners save money.

For a long time, economists have said that we need “smart” or “dynamic” electricity pricing — that people should be charged more for power at times of high energy demand, such as in the afternoon and early evening, when the actual electricity itself costs more on wholesale markets. This would lead to lower prices overall, but higher prices during peak periods. And slowly, such smart pricing schemes are being introduced to the grid (largely on a voluntary basis).

But if you combine “smart” pricing with solar and energy storage, then homeowners have another potential benefit, explains Ravi Manghani of GTM Research. They could store excess power from their solar panels during the day, and then actually use it in the evening when prices for electricity go up — and avoid the higher cost. “There’s an economic case to store the excess solar generation and use it during evening hours,” explains Manghani by email.

Notably, if there are future reductions in how much money solar panel owners can make selling excess power back to the grid — and that’s one thing the current pushback against net metering wants to achieve — then energy storage comes in and gives panel owners a new way for using that power.

“Storage increases the options,” explains Sean Gallagher, vice president of state affairs at the Solar Energy Industries Association. “It’s an enabling technology for solar. It allows customers to meet more scenarios economically.”

So in sum — cheaper, more easily available energy storage helps at the scale of the power grid, and also at the level of our homes, to further advantage cleaner, renewable energy. So if the economics of storage are finally starting to line up — and its business side to ramp up — that can only be good news for the planet.

wapo
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Incognitus

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 30961
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #95 em: 2015-05-01 21:08:49 »
As baterias são grosso modo exactamente iguais às que eu previ em capacidade, ciclos, preço, garantia, etc ...

"Nem tudo o que pode ser contado conta, e nem tudo o que conta pode ser contado.", Albert Einstein

Incognitus, www.thinkfn.com

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #96 em: 2015-05-01 21:12:48 »
the other side: a tesla skeptic

Elon Musk, Tesla Motors’ CEO, has been on quite a roll. In just the last 15 years, he cofounded PayPal (which now moves hundreds of billions of dollars of currency every year), started up Tesla (which now features a market cap about half that of General Motors [GM]), founded SpaceX (which recently launched the Deep Space Climate Observatory satellite), and was instrumental in the founding of SolarCity (which now holds a nearly 40 percent share of the solar electric market).

At virtually every step, Musk has been denigrated by short sellers, naysayers, and business journalists, but his winning streak continues. According to a headline in a CNET Magazine last year, “Second-Guessing Elon Musk Is Turning Into an Expensive Lesson.” Sooner or later his detractors will be right about something, as winning streaks don’t go on forever. Indeed, is Musk currently charging onto the very battleground on which he stumbles?

Last year, Musk kept the world guessing while he figured out where to locate his company’s battery-manufacturing Gigafactory—which, when it’s completed in 2017, is expected to produce more lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries than the current combined production of all manufacturers worldwide. By producing at such scale, Musk predicted that Tesla would drive down battery costs by 30 percent. We know now that the Gigafactory will be located near Reno, Nevada, and will cost $5 billion to construct. What we don’t know is whether it will have a similarly outsized impact on the electric vehicle, electric storage, and photovoltaic (PV) markets or whether it will be a monumental bust.

The plot thickened a few weeks ago, when Musk announced that Tesla was developing a battery for the home market. Business journalists were quick to note how disruptive those batteries could be to the entrenched utility industry, especially when combined with SolarCity’s PV panels. A few remaining Musk skeptics (okay, just me) wondered whether the Tesla home battery was really a disruptive threat or a sign that Musk is in over his head.

Here’s the skeptic’s take on the Tesla home battery: Tesla is actually under a lot of pressure. Low gas prices can’t be good for electric car sales, even Tesla’s. Competitors that have either announced plans to release models designed to compete with Tesla cars or are rumored to be planning on doing so include GM, Porsche, Audi, BMW, Mercedes, and even Apple. Sales in China have been well below expectations, and Tesla’s chief marketing officer in China quit just a few weeks ago. The handwriting is on the wall, and it says that Tesla is not going to sell enough cars to support the output of the Gigafactory. Instead, Musk needs to find more ways to sell those batteries, and find them fast.

Selling batteries to homeowners is not going to be easy. There’s a good reason why so few of us have large battery banks in our homes, and it’s not because there aren’t any for sale. Batteries are expensive, and the advantages they offer homeowners are few. The majority of homeowners with PV panels get most of the benefits of batteries by hooking up their panels to the grid at little or no cost. For homeowners without solar panels, the grid in most locations is sufficiently reliable that there’s little to gain from having battery backup. If Musk is going to sell those customers batteries, he’s going to have to sell them much more cheaply than current prices, and it’s not clear that a 30 percent cost reduction is going to be enough.

Musk isn’t the first corporate executive to make grandiose claims about a battery product and then be pressured to succeed. On just about the same day that Musk announced the Tesla home battery, Steve Levine, a journalist and an adjunct professor at Georgetown University, released a book titled The Powerhouse. It tells the story of the battery-manufacturing start-up Envia, whose product was touted in 2012 as a major breakthrough by the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy (ARPA-E), the federal government’s energy technology incubator. GM even bought into the dream, investing at least $7 million on top of the $4 million poured in by ARPA-E. But it was not to be, and ultimately GM’s engineers determined that the Envia battery could not achieve the performance promised by the company. There were even allegations that Envia didn’t own some of the technology on which its battery was based. By the end of 2013, GM backed out of the deal.

Envia has plenty of company in the overpromise-and-underdeliver club. For another, there’s A123 Systems, the 2005 battery start-up that promised to produce Li-ion batteries with higher power density and faster recharge time. The company received a $249 million federal grant in 2009 but filed for bankruptcy in 2012. Over the past century, a countless number of companies have been making extravagant battery claims and ultimately failing. It was none other than Thomas Edison who was quoted over 130 years ago (originally in the Boston Herald but more recently in an article by Steve Levine) as saying, “The storage battery is, in my opinion, a catchpenny, a sensation, a mechanism for swindling the public by stock companies. … Scientifically, storage is all right, but, commercially, as absolute a failure as one can imagine.”

When I visited the Thomas Edison National Historical Park in West Orange, New Jersey, the guides told me that Edison made more money off the battery than any other of his inventions. He surely understood how many human desires could be met with an inexpensive, light, and compact battery. He must have also understood how resistant battery technology is to making such a product feasible. Many have tried, but few have succeeded at more than eking out small incremental improvements.

Like Napoleon, who led France to victory in multiple wars, Elon Musk is now facing his own potential Waterloo. So far, he has prevailed against overwhelming odds. If he can master the intricacies of the electric battery, he will march on to unprecedented success. Musk may well find, though, that overcoming the inherent resistance of the electric battery to yield great increases in performance, or great decreases in price, is a bigger challenge than even he can overcome.

fonte
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Zel

  • Visitante
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #97 em: 2015-05-02 12:27:13 »
para uma casa normal ai com uns 200m2 quantos metros quadrados de paineis solares preciso para ter um consumo normal off-the-grid? assumindo claro que tenho as baterias...

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #98 em: 2015-05-02 17:49:40 »
How The Tesla Battery Will Benefit Marijuana Growers

A medium-sized commercial weed grow with around 50 lights stands to save about $13,500 in electricity costs a year with the use of two Tesla Batteries. Those will also protect the plants in case of power outages while making the operation less visible to law enforcement. Elon Musk just made growing weed easier.

Unveiled last night, the Tesla Battery gives home owners and businesses an easy, slick, affordable way to store electricity at home. The 10kWh battery costs just $3,500 and can be “stacked” in sets of up to nine units. Larger capacity batteries of infinitely-scaleable capacity will be available to large businesses and governments. There’s three general use cases for the battery: storing electricity purchased during cheaper, off-peak hours for use during high-demand periods; storing electricity generated by solar power or other renewable sources for use around the clock; and as a backup power source for when the grid goes down.

Know who uses an awful lot of electricity? Weed growers. We just called one and put him on the phone with a commercial energy use management expert to figure out how the Tesla Battery will benefit his home operation and others like it.

Our friend’s operation is small, but profitable. With eight to ten grow lights running 16-20 hours a day in his garage, as well as air-conditioning during hotter parts of the year, his monthly electricity bill is around $2,100, including his home use.

As a domestic consumer of electricity, he’s currently purchasing flat-rate power. In that current arrangement, the Tesla Battery would not save him money day-to-day. Where it would help would be during a power outage, where it would enable him to keep at least some of his lights on, part of the time. In total, those lights alone are using up to 250kWh of power a day, so even two 10kWh batteries could only keep some of the lights on part time.

But, that could be enough to prevent a large financial loss. “The plants start to get angry after about 72 hours without power,” the grower explains. “They won’t die, but the plants in veg will think it’s time to flower and switch over.”

In the lifecycle of a marijuana plant, the vegetative state is where the plants are growing. Depending on the individual plants and the method with which they’re being grown, this stage can last from two weeks to two months. Premature flowering would lead to smaller plants producing fewer, smaller buds and therefore a smaller crop.

The point in the plant lifecycle at which a power outage occurs, its duration and the amount of marijuana being grown will combine to determine the financial loss, but it’s safe to say that the Tesla Battery could throw growers a lifeline during extreme weather or natural disasters.

We’ve all heard stories about growers being outed by the energy intensive nature of their work. Roofs over grow rooms free of snow during winters or insanely high electricity bills have all, in those stories at least, tipped off the cops.

“It doesn’t work that way,” the grower explains. “The cops have to present a warrant to the electricity company to get your bill and, for that, they need probable cause. No, the electricity companies don’t always demand that warrant, but generally, this isn’t how it works. They’re not going through every power bill, looking for suspiciously high ones.”

One of the other touted benefits of the Battery is its ability to facilitate off-grid living. By hooking it up to solar panels, the Battery can store energy during the day, then keep your house powered throughout the night. Or your off-grid grow, maybe?

“I haven’t seen any solar-powered indoor grows yet,” says our guy. “I suspect the costs of the panels are still way too high.”

He’s right. The most powerful solar panel kit currently available at Home Depot costs $12,388 and produces only 3,800 to 8,900kWh a year. Best case scenario, that yearly total is only enough to power our buddy’s 8-10 lights for a little over a month. Look at it from a cost perspective and 10 times the price of his monthly electricity bill (lights only) nets him about 1/10th the power. And that’s before buying any batteries, Tesla or otherwise.

At this point, the real savings possible with the Tesla Battery come with scale. But not that much more.


Our commercial energy consumption management expert sat down and ran the numbers assuming a medium-sized, 50-light commercial operation running its A/C during the day. These numbers are based on commercial electricity rates here in California, where the company is paying a premium during high-demand hours.

With two 10kWh Tesla Batteries giving this commercial grow the ability to shift some of its load to off-peak hours, savings in demand charges alone would total $8,000 a year, while use charges would lower by $5,500, for a total savings of $13,500.

Of course, even just at 50 lights, we’re talking about a multi-million dollar operation, making this sound like relative chump change. Worthwhile — the batteries would be paid for in just over 6 months of savings — but hardly revolutionary.

“Where these batteries might start to make sense for small growers is when LEDs are optimized for herb,” says our grower. He’s skeptical of the light quality produced by current LED grow lights, but sees that technology being optimized for marijuana in the near future. When it is, it could drastically lower the energy consumption of growing, reducing electricity used by the lights alone by 60 percent or more. Lower outright energy consumption will reduce the cost of growing, of course, but it also shifts the amount of consumption into a range that could be more easily handled by Tesla Batteries.

Given the current pace of marijuana legalization, the need for clandestine home grows may largely be eliminated by the time dipping energy consumption and increasing battery capacity meet in a home solar power sweet zone, but as a massive electricity consumer, it does look like the marjiuana industry is going to profit from the same Tesla Battery benefits everyone else will — reduced peak demand and increased stability during outages.

gizmodo
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Incognitus

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 30961
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Musk et al
« Responder #99 em: 2015-05-02 17:53:57 »
 (repetição de outro tópico, aqui realmente fica melhor)

Essas contas estão mal feitas.

Passo a explicar

A única versão da bateria que serve para ciclos diários é a versão de 7 kWh.

(2 baterias)

2x7kWh = 14 kWh, 1 ciclo por dia de 14 kWh

A diferença entre o preço da electricidade em peak e off peak podemos considerar $0.20/kWh.

Logo por dia aquilo poupa $2.8. Por ano (365 dias) poupa $1022.
"Nem tudo o que pode ser contado conta, e nem tudo o que conta pode ser contado.", Albert Einstein

Incognitus, www.thinkfn.com