Mercedes-Benz Copies Tesla, Plans To Offer Home Energy Storage

cartechboy writes: It's like a game of follow the leader. First, Tesla announced its Powerwall Batteries, and now Mercedes-Benz plans to follow suit by entering the energy-storage business as well. A division of parent company Daimler has been testing battery packs that can power houses, and plans to launch commercially in September. Supposedly a battery pack for "light industrial, commercial, and private" use is being tested with sizes ranging from 2.5 kWh to 5.9 kWh. While Tesla's building a massive Gigafactory to make all its batteries for its Powerwall and electric cars, it's unclear exactly how Daimler plans to produce its batteries in a larger-scale energy-storage operation.

Comments

Cost effectiveness

[penguinoid]

If it is cost effective to store energy, wouldn't power companies be doing it?

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Anonymous Coward]

It is cost effective for power companies to make consumers front the cost of power storage, no?

Re:Cost effectiveness

[kriston]

The goal wasn't really to store energy for the house. The actual goal is to store energy to recharge your electric vehicle quickly and without overloading your local power grid.

The use of energy in the house is an added-on benefit and makes it more appealing to buyers. Some might also call this a "gimmick."

Re:Cost effectiveness

[codealot]

Local in-home storage solves two problems that the utilities can't easily solve:

- power outages / grid failures
- storage of local solar power

We can feed in-home solar back to the grid, but it's more efficient to store and use ourselves.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[pr0fessor]

wrong question. It should be.. How do you make it cost effective enough for power companies to use it?

Doesn't gigafactory make you think of Lexx?

Re:Cost effectiveness

[LWATCDR]

Frankly that makes no sense. The 10KWh battery from Tesla is only good for 50 cycles a year. It is a replacement for a back up generator at best. The 7KWh pack could work for solar storage but frankly they are not cost effective no storage method is cost effective except maybe hydro storage.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[amorsen]

In many places electricity is taxed or high distribution tariffs apply. When you combine that with low feed-in tariffs, those with solar panels have a strong incentive to use their own power rather than export and import power.

Thus, it is cost effective to store energy for the consumer, not for the power companies -- and sometimes it is cost effective for the consumer to store energy expensive high-demand power from the middle of the day and use it during the night when power is otherwise cheap. Some power companies are investing in batteries to do the exact opposite, of course.

In the grand scheme of things there are larger fish to fry when it comes to tax and tariffs though, where the interests of society do not align with the incentives provided to individual people. E.g. it is rather stupid to tax labour, which is a clean and beneficial way to improve our society, instead of resource consumption which causes pollution and poverty.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[drinkypoo]

They're already making money doing what they do now. If they let other people work out the bugs, then they can implement whatever technology turns out to mature most rapidly or most fully or most cheaply, whatever makes the spreadsheets come out at the time

Re:Cost effectiveness

[sribe]

The 7KWh pack could work for solar storage but frankly they are not cost effective no storage method is cost effective except maybe hydro storage.

Actually, at a time-of-day cost differential of about $0.22/kWh they are break-even. So, not cost effective in most areas, but very very close. Bump up the peak prices of power in CA a bit, or bring the PowerWall cost down or capacity up a bit, and you're there.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Anonymous Coward]

Depends where you live. In California you can have "Time of Use" plans TOU where it costs .46 cents/kwh at peak and only .09cents off peak. If the battery charges up at 9 cents and then powers the house at .46cents there will be a significant savings.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[FlyHelicopters]

Depends where you live. In California you can have "Time of Use" plans TOU where it costs .46 cents/kwh at peak and only .09cents off peak. If the battery charges up at 9 cents and then powers the house at .46cents there will be a significant savings.

How long will those plans last once more than a small number of people buy these?

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Anonymous Coward]

It is cheaper to make sure that nobody sells what you need to reduce their profit. It is more cost effective not to use a power company if the solar industry is not pushed down by monopolization. For example, GA Power has a lottery for people that want to sell back solar power at below market prices. This lottery limits the participants that want to contribute solar power and provide lower power costs. Now what where you saying about power companies? Did I hear echo of cable service providers?

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would they do that when they can just charge a premium for peak demand?

Also, they are supplementing their supply side with solar, so that keep them from having to do it.

If you switch to demand based billing, you can save money by acquiring cheaper energy and using that during peak demand. For instance, I get a 12% discount for non-peak usage, but that is offset by a cost of 250% during peak usage. If I buy more electricity during non-peak (charge my batteries), and then use no electricity from the grid during peak demand, I get a 12% discount off of non-demand based pricing all of the time and can use that to cover my battery system that can also be used if there is no power at all. This will work to smooth out the overall demand and not cause surge production that is fossil fuel based.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Alomex]

RIght, because if it were cost effective to move your encyclopedia to the Internet, Britannica would have done it first. And if it were cost efficient to stream music, record companies would have done it first.

Because that is exactly how the free market works. Perfect every single time. I'm glad you were paying attention during Indoctrination to Economics 101.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Anonymous Coward]

The charge efficiency isnt perfect. L-ion charge efficiency losses are 10-20% on both ends (charging and discharging) so consider around a 30% loss of the power you're storing.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm. . . . at $0.22/kWh I think I would be looking at moving where the cost of everything ( including electricity ) isn't ludicrous instead of spending an additional $$$$ on a limited use battery to help offset it.

( Note: I just locked in a three year rate of $0.09/kWh in a State where AC is pretty much mandatory vs optional )

CA has nice weather ( assuming you can afford to live near the ocean ) but it really is on the upper end of the stupid scale when it comes to cost of living in the US. ( I think CA and NY compete with each other for that title )

Re: Cost effectiveness

[Anonymous Coward]

At around £75,000+ per mile for mains then yes energy storage is very cost effective.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[bill_mcgonigle]

Because that is exactly how the free market works.

"Free market power companies." Cool, where can I get one?

The ones I have available are state-granted monopolies (fascism). They take any operating profits and pay a "healthy" dividend to investors - there's no need to invest in future-benefit infrastructure because the PUC will always give them a rate increase if they can show present supply and demand data, discounting all past squandered opportunity. It would be foolish for them to ever do anything else because they face no competitive pressure.

That's where solar comes in ... the only feasible competition to the extant fascisitic power system. Solar itself isn't that smart, but a second choice is leagues better than no choice at all.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean, would power generation companies enter the power storage business? Maybe. But they are different markets.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Anonymous Coward]

No. The home batteries have only a fraction (~1/10th) of the capacity of a vehicle battery. It would make more sense to have a connector on the car, that you could plug your house into as an alternative to a backup generator - a 85kWh Tesla car battery would power the average US household for almost three days. House batteries are being sold as time-shifting devices that draw from the grid at night prices and power the house during peak hours. It can save a bit of money and only needs a few hours of run time, plus your toys will survive a power outage.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[thegarbz]

If it is cost effective to store energy, wouldn't power companies be doing it?

Cost effective for who? The idea of something being cost effective has to take into account all sorts of externalities. It is cost effective for me to run my entire life on a surface tablet. It would not be cost effective for the drafters in the office to do the same thing.

The same applies to a power company. If you have a giant turbine that runs all the time and you get paid for running that turbine and there are significant costs to starting and shutting down that turbine then it is not cost effective at all to store energy. If you're a solar power plant operating PV cells in a market that will pay you heavily with high electricity prices then it is also not cost effective.

If you're trying to get off the grid, live in a scenario where there's no net metering, or if you're a power company that can't benefit from large revenues on energy created then you're likely already looking into such a system, except at power company scales they typically opt for a slightly different technology.

Re: Cost effectiveness

[WindBourne]

Nice thought, but their plan has been to grow, rather than manage, energy. Oddly, a few power companies have figured out that the old ways do not work for them, but are still fighting change.

Re: Cost effectiveness

[WindBourne]

Hawaii has electricity at .38/kWh, and gas is expensive. A lot of the east coast has .20 differentials as well. Hopefully , Tesla hard targets Hawaii for solar, battery and car. It really makes good sense there. From there they can target NY, NJ, MA, etc.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[tompaulco]

If it is cost effective to store energy, wouldn't power companies be doing it?

Of course they would. It would be far cheaper to store up generated energy at night and release during the day at peak usage than it would be to build another plant to handle the increased needs of the day. However, it is not economically viable to store energy in this fashion, even in the economies of scale of a power plant. Therefore, it is much less cost effective on an individual consumer basis.

Re: Cost effectiveness

[gl4ss]

so how much is the night time electricity in hawaii then? the daytime price alone is meaningless for knowing if it makes sense to store the energy in the battery to be used during the day.

it's just a battery.. I never understood the tesla fanbois who started claiming that we can power everything with the batteries..

making the battery packs for ultra-quick charging of cars makes much more sense (it avoids having to build thicker power lines to the houses, which in most western locales is more expensive than an interim storage at the house).

Re:Cost effectiveness

[jblues]

I would imagine the following effects over time:

• * Prices of peak and off-peak become flat rate throughout the day.
• * Electricity companies decommission their peak power generators, and just run at near 100% utilization all day. Because of this they can temporarily increase profit taking.
• * Competition will mean eventually passing on savings to consumers.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[FlyHelicopters]

Of course that all misses the point I was trying to make...

If you buy one of these based on "power savings" from shifting from off-peak to peak, those "savings" go away when the various rates go away...

As for competition, a lot of places with time of day charges don't have any competition, but it probably will help in some places.

Re: Cost effectiveness

[WindBourne]

Ok, so many things wrong here:
1), In Hawaii, that 1-2 battery pack is enough to power their homes at nighttime. The reason is that they pretty much have no HVAC. They are currently prohibited from adding Solar and then selling to back to the utility. However, if they add batteries for the home, and have the car, then they do NOT need the local utility. And with .38/KWH, these are MUCH cheaper to run for home.
2) nearly all homes in America do NOT need to have increased power lines to handle an electric car. The reason is that nearly all of our homes have 200 amps and can handle a dryer AND an electric oven. Even at the same time.
For charging an EV at home, all you need is a 240 V/40 A, just like on Dryers, and then have the car autocharge after 1 AM.

What does not make sense is why so many ppl hate Tesla and scream that anybody who sees economic value in it, to be a fanbois.

Re: Cost effectiveness

[rtb61]

It is not just a battery, it is a 'CAPITAL INVESTMENT'. Do no get sucked in by the PR agents seeking to keep you tied to their last millennium infrastructure, which you must rent access to and then burn you money to get energy. They way you calculate the benefits of generating you own electricity and making that energy available 24/7/365 (no more out of your control black outs, keep the maintenance up though otherwise you will be creating your own), is to look at the capital cost, calculate the value of the energy you will be generating over a year and see whether that percentage return is better than other investments, like bank interests or even loan repayments on that investment. Keep in mind that capital investment does enhance your property value and the more reputable the better.

So powered by Tesla or powered by Mercedes, works for them for marketing purposes (branded equipment and panels, reminds people about other products) as well as for you (they are not just buying a house but reliable energy, that house can generate, based upon the reputation of the manufacturer).

So rent and burn or invest and earn (energy that is). Now that is the message the fossil fuellers hate and really do fear.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Anonymous Coward]

There is quite a bit of loss when moving electricity from one place to another.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[jblues]

Really? I thought I was agreeing with you.

"Electricity companies decommission their peak power generators, and just run at near 100% utilization all day. Because of this they can temporarily increase profit taking."

The savings will go away because rates become flat and providers increase profit taking. Eventually (hopefully) competitive pressures bring overall (ie averaged over a year) prices down again, because the cost of production is cheaper.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Jack Griffin]

Actually, at a time-of-day cost differential of about $0.22/kWh they are break-even. So, not cost effective in most areas, but very very close.

When you say most areas, you mean most areas in your immediate vicinity? This is an international forum (you know the Internet isn't just in your suburb right?), and where I live it's 46c/kwh peak, 9c/kwh offpeak. And it's going up every year. Where do I sign up?

Re:Cost effectiveness

[LWATCDR]

" This is an international forum "
Really? This forum is in english and is based in the US. The news is mostly US based. Sure people from around the world come here but this is most certainly a US based forum. It is no more an international based forum than a web forum based in France and where the posts are in French is or any other forum on the Internet. Sure everyone is welcome but it is a US centric site.

Re: Cost effectiveness

[sribe]

it's just a battery.. I never understood the tesla fanbois who started claiming that we can power everything with the batteries..

It costs about 1/4 as much as the currently-available alternatives with the same capacity.

Re: Cost effectiveness

[kriston]

No. The homes can handle the power load, but the power grid cannot. You can't have a large proportion of houses in the neighborhood pulling 40 amps at 240VAC continuously for four to six hours every night at the same time.

There are dozens of companies developing home storage for electric vehicles because of this. It's a serious logistical problem.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[FlyHelicopters]

Right, but then if rates become flat, why have a battery to do power shifting?

As people stop buying them when the rates even out, you're back to the same problem.

The reason for buying them goes away, if there is no savings, then people will stop using them.

Re: Cost effectiveness

[Muad'Dave]

You can't have a large proportion of houses in the neighborhood pulling 40 amps at 240VAC continuously for four to six hours every night at the same time.

I disagree. Homes currently pull quite a bit of load during the afternoon and evening - AC running, stove running, clothes dryer running, etc. That's when all of the generation capacity is running full-tilt. 40A at 240V is just under 10kW - not a whole lot of power, really. There's no real reason (other than cost) that the peak demand curve can't be extended out over additional hours, as long as the peak demand GW figure doesn't increase.

From this page:

Across the United States, but most pronounced in New England, the ratio of annual peak-hour electric demand to average hourly demand has risen over the past 20 years. In New England, the peak-to-average demand ratio has increased from 1.52 in 1993 to 1.78 in 2012. In other words, the highest peak-hour electric demand for the year in 1993 was 52% above the hourly average level while in 2012 peak-hour demand had risen to 78% above the hourly average level.

This higher ratio translates into decreasing average utilization levels for generators in New England and other regions. Electric systems maintain sufficient capacity to meet expected peak loads plus a reserve margin. As the peak-to-average ratio rises, generators called on to meet peak-hour demand are running fewer hours and/or at lower output levels the rest of the year. Because energy payments are generator's primary source of revenue in regional transmission organization (RTO) systems such as New England's Independent Systems Operator (ISO), the rising ratio of peak-to-average hourly demand is likely cutting into generator revenues and increasing the importance of capacity market payments to generators.

From this, it looks like the peak-to-average demand ratio was lower in the past and has been increasing lately, making the additional capacity needed to hit peak load run less often (the peak curve is much sharper/taller than it used to be). "As the peak-to-average ratio rises, generators called on to meet peak-hour demand are running fewer hours and/or at lower output levels the rest of the year." This is very costly, so I bet the generators would welcome additional load at off-peak times to recoup the cost of the additional capacity.

Re: Cost effectiveness

[kriston]

The dryer, stove, AC, hot water heater, and other appliances do not pull full continuous load for several hours at a time. The electric car charging port *does*.

And your quoted article doesn't say anything about what that load might be, just that it is "increasing."

And, please, try re-read my post more carefully. I am talking about the power distribution grid and not power generation.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[jblues]

Ah, I see what you mean. I suspect at that point they can sell you a solar cell and/or turbine to go with your battery?

Re:Cost effectiveness

[haruchai]

Hawaii, Australia and Germany are already at the point where the PowerWall or something like it will pay back before the warrany expires.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Jack Griffin]

" This is an international forum " Really? This forum is in english and is based in the US. The news is mostly US based. Sure people from around the world come here but this is most certainly a US based forum. It is no more an international based forum than a web forum based in France and where the posts are in French is or any other forum on the Internet. Sure everyone is welcome but it is a US centric site.

No it isn't, it is a technology centric site. It even tells you that in the title. You are a US-centric person because that's the poor education that you had as a child. Using your own data against you, The US barely makes 10% of the market https://www.google.com.au/tren...

Re: Cost effectiveness

[WindBourne]

And yet, numerous studies by EIA, and others, show that you have no clue of what you are talking about. Over and over, they have said that the grid can EASILY handle converting 100% of our vehicles to EV, so long as more than 85% of the cars charge at night.
Here you go. Here is a link explaining the most CURRENT study proving you wrong.

Re: Cost effectiveness

[Muad'Dave]

The dryer, stove, AC, hot water heater, and other appliances do not pull full continuous load for several hours at a time.

After a shower or clothes washing, the water heater does. The clothes dryer certainly does. Typical electric water heaters have dual 4500W coils. If you run very low on hot water, both of those coils run at the same time - that's 37.5A / 9kW right there. A typical clothes dryer pulls 30A at 240V, so that's another 7.2kW. If you're like us, you come home, start the washing machine (which kicks off the water heater), start dinner (there goes the stove and/or cooktop), switch the washed clothes to the dryer, start another wash load, rinse and repeat. This usage pattern continues for at least a few hours.

I am talking about the power distribution grid and not power generation.

Then my points are just as valid. I assume you mean distribution and not transmission - the fact that the distribution grid can handle peak load for an area that shares essentially the same load curve at all means the distribution grid can handle it for longer periods - they're not running the distribution grid up against time/thermal limits on the transformers. If you look at the graphs in the document I linked to, you can see that the grid runs at less than 50% capacity for more than 75% of the hours in a year.

If you meant the transmission grid, they you're closer to correct. The transmission grid depends on the load moving across load areas and timezones, but off-peak generation is more than capable of handling the additional local capacity, so there's no need to move the off-peak load over transmission grid interties.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[LWATCDR]

Wow....
That is just search results.

Let's take a look at the subjects on the front page today.
The Linux Foundation. Based in San Francisco and registered as a Not for profit in the US.
Disney and H1B workers... US based company and H1Bs are US Visas.
The Moon. Not US centric.
Microsoft selling feature phones. US based company doing business overseas.
The American Cancer Society's IT overhaul.
GIT Hub affects people all over but the company is US based.
NASA.
Batterroo US based.
SpaceX US based.
Windows 10 Microsoft US based.
How much Google is spending on lobbying the US government.
Virginia and self driving cars.
AMD US based company.
Egyptian out ranks Google. No US centric.
Making an AR-15 in the Wired offices. Guns and Wired...
Seems very US centric to me. Almost every story has something to do with the US or US companies. Some effect other nations but everyone has a connection to the US.

Maybe I am wrong but something of interest has to be happening in the world that does not involve a US company and or the US government. I left out that Slashdot was founded in the US and current owner is Dice and they are located in New York.
This is a US centric site. Nothing wrong with that and of course everyone is welcome but The majority of the people on this site are from the US and the majority of the stories are about US companies and the US government. Not all but the majority.

Re: Cost effectiveness

[WindBourne]

One thing that so many miss on these studies is that if more than 15% of the vehicles charge in the daytime, then the grid and possibly energy, is not enough. It will demand major money to be spent.
It is for that very reason why I am opposed to subsidies for hybrids, or any general purpose EV with less than 100 MPC. And ideally, any large subsidy should be ONLY for vehicles with 150+ MPC. They are the ones that will actually lower the costs of delivered electricity.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Jack Griffin]

Ironic you say that in a thread about a German Car manufacturer...

Re:Cost effectiveness

[LWATCDR]

Really? Maybe you did not notice that the thread title is that a German company is copying a US company?

The difference between US Centric and US exclusive.
In fact I would guess that it is pretty rare to find a front page story without a US connection. The only common ones I can think of would be stories about CERN, ESA, and Airbus. I do not see why you take such offense to a site based in the US being US centric. Sure some people on the site are not from the US but that is to be expected.

Re: Cost effectiveness

[kriston]

If your hot water heater, dryer, and stove run continuously for any extended amount of time, then you've got to call your electrician.

None of these appliances is going to run a full 4- to 6-hour duty cycle. Try it. Even your stove doesn't run continuously when you turn it on. Do you even own an electric stove or water heater?

And distribution vs. transmission is not a big difference for my argument. It cannot now handle the load.

Re: Cost effectiveness

[kriston]

Wow, if the figures projected by this article turn out to be true in the real world, I stand corrected.

However, since my own home has a load-management cutoff switch for my water heater to reduce load on peak days, I have a doubt how successful it will be in actual real-world situations.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Jack Griffin]

Dude, it's a technology site, it even says so it the title. If you've actually read any comments at all ever you would realise this and stop being such a US-centric arse-clown.

Gigafactories don't start out as Gigafactories

[Mr D from 63]

Too much is made of "competing' with a not yet built gigafactory. That gigafactory will initially be more costly to operate than a smaller ones, as they pay for unused infrastructure. Economies of scale won't help until the scale gets big enough. So there is no immediate advantage for Tesla in that regard.

Re:Gigafactories don't start out as Gigafactories

[Anonymous Coward]

they might be paying for unused infrastructure.... but I think the state of nevada is covering those costs.

Re:Gigafactories don't start out as Gigafactories

[codealot]

Yes--Tesla has become a giant vaporware producer. Their fans speak as if Tesla has already cornered the EV and battery storage markets, in reality all they've done is ship a few Model S cars and made various announcements for products we can't yet buy (Model X, Model 3, Powerwall).

Re:Gigafactories don't start out as Gigafactories

[radl33t]

But capital markets love vaporware and this kind of ludicrous access to the capital markets is propelling Tesla at a rate equivalent or in excess of the r&d pace that the stodgy old auto mfgs can pursue. It has a kind of perverted logic too it in a highly speculative sense.

Re:Gigafactories don't start out as Gigafactories

[Anonymous Coward]

What unused infrastructure?... They'll pretty much ramp up production of batteries as fast as possible to cover demand, so saying it will be more 'costly' is like saying it's more 'costly to start building a factory on day 1 since you haven't started production yet.

Re:Gigafactories don't start out as Gigafactories

[Anonymous Coward]

Forget the Tesla giga-hype and just go buy a Chevy Volt. Shipping now!
Oh I forgot, Tesla is going to be the Apple of cars. High priced status items.

Re:Gigafactories don't start out as Gigafactories

[Anonymous Coward]

In the light of recent articles about Tesla's heavy reliance on government money, you'll likely pay for the battery twice - first with your taxes, then the selling price. And they'll still be shipping their batteries from China, even if you all pay for their gigafactory.

Re:Gigafactories don't start out as Gigafactories

[NoKaOi]

Yes--Tesla has become a giant vaporware producer.

Vaporware? So those Tesla vehicles I see driving down the road aren't actually functional or driving? That's quite an impressive illusion. Just because production is low doesn't mean it's vaporware.

Re:Gigafactories don't start out as Gigafactories

[dummy14141555]

Bzzzt. Wrong. This is not about competing with the gigafactory. MB is staking a spot in the space against all the other newcomers who would brand a retail style home power solution. Also, by tailoring their product, they also approach similar suppliers to tesla, before other competitors also ask for similar supplies and drive up the cost.

Re:Gigafactories don't start out as Gigafactories

[Mr D from 63]

Where did I say it WAS about competing with the gigafactory? I was talking about the article and the fact too much is made of it. quotes like;

"And without a Gigafactory of its own, it's less clear how Daimler will supply a larger-scale energy-storage operation."

Don't pin that shit on me.

Re:Gigafactories don't start out as Gigafactories

[PPalmgren]

The point of offering home energy storage is to be able to build a Gigafactory earlier for the economies of scale benefit. The reason they are offering home energy storage isn't because of high margins, its to be able to build a bigger Gigafactory earlier and become a leader in the battery market. Competing on home energy storage is just a way to ensure high utilization of the factory. Without the factory, home energy storage only takes away from your main product line (car batteries) which are much more profitable.

Video Bytes?

[Anonymous Coward]

What's Video Bytes and how do I get rid of it? For a minute I was worried I downloaded something from Sourceforge and caught some kind of malware.

Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't understand why they just don't roll over...

Re:Can u say bubble?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah. Didn't work out so well for Edison either.

Where to get the batteries?

[Cytotoxic]

it's unclear exactly how Daimler plans to produce its batteries in a larger-scale energy-storage operation.

Perhaps by writing big checks to battery suppliers like Tesla and Panasonic? And of course from their current supplier for electric vehicles: A123Systems.

Or were working on it all along

[Anonymous Coward]

And Slashdot was too busy fellating Musk to notice.

Mercedes-Benz is to Microsoft Zune

[Spy Handler]

what Tesla was to ipod

Re:Mercedes-Benz is to Microsoft Zune

[LWATCDR]

Funny but I think Tesla is Rio in this metaphor.

Tesla is not a successful car or battery company yet. It still has not made a profit.

Re:Mercedes-Benz is to Microsoft Zune

[riverat1]

Yet they've got enough cash flow to sink a ton of money into R&D and growing the company which may be more important as this stage of their development.

Re:Mercedes-Benz is to Microsoft Zune

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I mean, one's clearly incompetent at the field, and has never shipped a physical product while ... oh wait, yeah, Mercedes is a leader in the field, knows vehicles and power generation well, has successful products scaling from subcompact cars to large industrial diesel-electric prime movers, and is selling plug-in hybrids, so they clearly know nothing about the field, just like Microsoft. Oh yeah, they're a successful company that doesn't need the billion dollars of subsidy that Tesla does.

Re:Mercedes-Benz is to Microsoft Zune

[LWATCDR]

If the R&D pays off.
Doesn't really matter, for a company success == profit.
Having enough VC to keep the lights on == surviving.
Tesla is not a successful car company yet.

Re:Can u say bubble?

[Anonymous Coward]

If only that 90-year-old, worldwide, multi-billion-dollar corporation knew as much about how to make money as you do!

I'm sure they're really kicking themselves for not asking your advice before moving forward with this.

+1 Insightful

[Anonymous Coward]

yarrrr

Copies Tesla???

[antiperimetaparalogo]

Mercedes-Benz Copies Tesla

Let's not make it "Europe against USA" but Mercedes (Daimler) was in the energy-storage (battery-pack) business (think industrial and defence sectors, plus -much more limited- residential storage - with the same technology as Tesla) looong before Tesla even existed - i don't mean that it is better than Tesla, but please... not "Copies Tesla"!

Re: Copies Tesla???

[EmagGeek]

This is Slashdot. Did you really expect anything other than rampant, hard-core bias in favor of Tesla? It matters not that Daimler and dozens of other companies have been doing battery storage power facilities for decades before Tesla existed.

Re: Copies Tesla???

[antiperimetaparalogo]

This is Slashdot. Did you really expect anything other than rampant, hard-core bias in favor of Tesla? It matters not that Daimler and dozens of other companies have been doing battery storage power facilities for decades before Tesla existed.

Well, i must agree with you!
I know that i wrote 'Let's not make it "Europe against USA"', but i hope some German (or even an Austrian!) will do his "nationalistic duty" and inform with more details our Yankee friends about that...

Re: Copies Tesla???

[Anonymous Coward]

quit being a cunt.

Re: Copies Tesla???

[bill_mcgonigle]

Daimler and dozens of other companies have been doing battery storage power facilities for decades before Tesla existed.

Is it just that Tesla has better marketing? Because none of these other "players" have put out a press release with a website to sign up for an install in the next year, at functional prices, that I've ever seen.

Links appreciated to equivalent product, since Tesla sold out before the SolarCity offices opened in my state (the drywall is still going in).

Re: Copies Tesla???

[Anonymous Coward]

Functional prices? You have a price for their system? What most of you neckbeards don't understand that their advertised price is for nothing but cells. No backing system whatsoever. Let's find out what that is before we bang the Tesla drum too loud. Aside from that, Google is your friend. Large scale home electricity storage is out there for the taking today.

Re: Copies Tesla???

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed. Tesla fanbois tend to forget Porsche invented the hybrid electric too. And the 918 is fantastically more fun to dream about than anything Tesla is offering.

Re: Copies Tesla???

[WindBourne]

Yes, but hybrids are pure junk and have nothing to do with Tesla.

Re: Copies Tesla???

[AmiMoJo]

Yep, it's not like they just saw the Tesla announcement and rushed out their own project in a month. This sort of thing will have been in development for years.

Re: Copies Tesla???

[antiperimetaparalogo]

Good point!

I hear Rolls also makes batteries

[Ken_g6]

Actually, I learned that in a comment here on Slashdot!

Alas, it's just Rolls, no Royce.

Holy Bias, Batman

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy shit, could the submitter have crammed any more bias into that summary?

Re:Can u say bubble?

[Anonymous Coward]

BA DUM tsssss.

Interesting Move

[monkeyxpress]

The linked article just appears to be an advert for Mercedes cars, but this is quite an interesting development. I don't know if it is more a response to a market gap given the current issues Germany is having with too many renewables on their grid, or part of a broader strategy around their electric vehicles. Either way it is pretty exciting to see how quickly electric infrastructure is developing.

As an EE who has spent a huge amount of time fixing cars (don't buy a Peugeot) I think electric cars will be a no-brainer for customers once the cost reduces further, and I think Tesla is trying to push that point forward by creating another mass market for batteries. If they can get it right, things could change very quickly, and I think companies like Mercedes can see this.

I hope that Elon Musk can make these businesses viable and sustainable. In an era where most corporations increase profits by finding new ways to screw over their customers and create artificial scarcity, it's pretty exciting to think that in 20 years time driving a car could be cheaper than it is now and potentially even sustainable. In a world where most of the smartest people are trying to find ways to make you click on an advert or manipulate financial markets, this sort of thing is sadly pretty rare.

Trolleys and electric companies

[nycsubway]

That's similar to how many electric companies in the United States started because they had excess generation from their electric trolley lines and then got into the electric supply and distribution business. Eventually the energy companies survived, but their trolley business faded away.

Re:Trolleys and electric companies

[Anonymous Coward]

You're high. Name ONE trolly company that got into the electricity supply/distribution business.

Re:Trolleys and electric companies

[schlachter]

I think alot of people don't remember/realize that in the 1920's the most common car was an electric car.

Re:Trolleys and electric companies

[Anonymous Coward]

From a bit of web searching, an example would be Asheville Electric Company which was a merger of the electric trolley systems in that town in 1900 which later became (in 1912) the Asheville Power and Light Company. And it seems to be not an uncommon pattern.

Energy storage

[DrYak]

wouldn't power companies be doing it?

Here around power companies DO INDEED do it.
And it's called a hydroelectric dam.

- You let it fill when unneeded (and thus store the energy as gravity potential energy). Or you can even actively pump water into it if you want to charge using electricity as an input.
- You start emptying it through the power station to supplement other energy sources when demand exceeds power capacity (as might happen with some forms of renewable energy).

On a really smaller scale, that has also been always the case with isolated usage of solar panels. When you're to remote to be connected to a power grid, instead of feeding the excess electricity into the grid and using the power grid later when needed, you store the excess electricity into batteries and retrieve it when needed.

(And in a way, if you think about it, lots of on-demand energy power-plants - e.g.: nuclear reactor - do in a way store the energy. Except that the form varies (e.g.: uranium/thorium don't store the energy as chemical states as lithium doesr) and usually can't be directly charged using electricity.)

So yes, power companies DO store energy. But due to the scale at which they work, they tend to chose denser (nuclear fuel) or bigger quantities (lakes at electric dam) than a a few kWh worth of lithium batteries.

Re: Energy storage

[WindBourne]

However , batteries are a cheap way to buffer varying demand. In addition, flow batteries are becoming cheap.

Re:Energy storage

[AmiMoJo]

In Japan and Hawaii power companies are installing grid scale batteries. They are sodium sulphur based, typically in the 50-100MWh range. Ideal for smoothing renewable sources. Fairly clean and easy to recycle too.

This explains why the PowerWall sold out so fast

[microcars]

MB bought them all so they could re-brand them and mark them up. Mystery Solved!

Re:Can u say bubble?

[Captain Splendid]

I love all you Americans crowing about the uselessness of the coming distributed energy age. Y'all might be correct as far as the US goes (and for now), but for billions of us in the rest of the world, shit like this has either been cost-effective for years or one of the few methods to get any kind of electricity when you don't the massive capital for the old-school way.

So what? It's a good idea.

[Anonanonaon]

Repeat after me: TESLA HAS INVENTED NOTHING NEW. THIS INCLUDES HYPERLOOPS AND ALL THEIR OTHER SHIT. STOP BUYING INTO THE FUCKING HYPE YOU MORONS.

So, Tesla is basically doing what Apple did, except promoting something which is actually useful and not soul-destroying?

-Not to mention.., instead of building it all in slave factories overseas, Tesla is investing in American labor and technology.

I don't see the reason to wax alarmist here.

I'd still go with lead-acid for home energy storage, (they're uglier, but offer the same cost per kwh at around triple the product life span. Lead-acid is just better chemistry for deep cycle installations.)

But seeing the market shift over to renewables, energy owned by the individual rather than the oligarchy, is a pretty great thing, and Tesla is at the forefront of promoting that into popularity. I'm not going to dump on them for being good at marketing when they're also being good at "human".

Competition is king, we welcome it

[Anonymous Coward]

I welcome any company who wants to throw their hat into the ring that is energy storage via battery.

This can only be a good thing.

Copying is the sincerest form of flattery.

Re:Competition is king, we welcome it

[HiThere]

Weelllll.....maybe.

Batteries can have a few problems. Exploding, e.g. (To be honest, I can't think of a form of energy storage that doesn't have a few problems.)

This probably means that there need to be construction standards for how the batteries are installed that will protect the house that they power from being destroyed if there's a battery problem. Not an insurmountable problem, but I haven't heard anyone talking about that yet.

Re:So what? It's a good idea.

[Anonymous Coward]

You mad, bro?
 
Seriously, anytime I see a moron rant on against Apple in a conversation that in no way touched on Apple I know I'm dealing with a jackass and a loser.
 
It's unfortunate you can't just make a valid point and move on. You sound like the idiots who have to shoehorn their politics into every conversation too.

Mercedes has been shipping this for years

[Anonymous Coward]

Mercedes has been shipping power generation/storage solutions for decades. This is not a "move to rival Tesla"; it's merely moving into a subsidized market. Note that Tesla is losing money, and only trying to play in subsidized markets while Mercedes has been a successful, profitable manufacturing company for a long time.

Back-Up Required

[Anonymous Coward]

Is the Honda diesel generator a free-bee to sweeten the deal? If MB cops Tesla then the diesel generator is required to re-charge the batteries.

Ha ha

Another Elon Musk Ponzi scheme at work.

Ja ja

They already sell batteries for power companies

[grimJester]

From TFA:

The company created a subsidiary called ACCUmotive in 2009 to develop lithium-ion batteries. It built an energy-storage array that is now operated by German electricity joint venture Coulomb. The system's 96 lithium-ion "modules" boast a combined 500 kilowatt hours of storage capacity, which is used to stabilize the Saxony Kamenz power grid. There are plans to expand this installation to 3,000 kWh of storage capacity.

Re:Can u say bubble?

[Anonymous Coward]

Eventually America will find it's way and kick your sorry ass...

economies of scale

[Anonymous Coward]

This is solely to do with purchasing power. A race to the lowest cost before competitors drive up the demand.

Copies Tesla?

[Anonymous Coward]

Daimler has been making batteries for EV's for ...quite a while and they started working on consumer battery packs a ffew years ago.
Sounds to me like timothy-doesn't-know-his-zeigeist.

Re: Copies Tesla?

[WindBourne]

Google for 'Daimler makes electric batteries' and you will find that lg makes them for Daimler.

this will be the end of Daimler. They do not make their own batteries.

Me Too! Me Too!!

[dummy14141555]

This is only to do with economies of scale. Their goal is to get in, get the best contracts before demand drives up the cost to enter the business segment. MB just saw the writing o the wall and decided they would rather not be the "Borders Booksellers" of the new energy consumption paradigm. Don't try to analyze a business decision with an oscilloscope.

Re:So what? It's a good idea.

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, anytime I see a moron rant on against Apple in a conversation that in no way touched on Apple I know I'm dealing with a jackass and a loser.

And since you didn't see that, but instead have chosen to willfully misinterpret an offhand mention of Apple as a "rant", you know that you ARE a jackass and a loser.

Re:Can u say bubble?

[Anonymous Coward]

Good thing the music industry never invested in the non-existant MP3 market. Bunch of idiots think you can sell MP3's for $1? Idiots...

Good thing Blockbuster never invested in mailing DVD's... who the fuck would use that? And video over the internet? What a waste of investment potential...

Good thing we have you, oh great anon, to fix the err of our way.

Re:So what? It's a good idea.

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, yes you did. And you still suck a cock.
 
Oh, and I'm replying to this so you get the notification instead of your oh-so-clever AC reply.
 
A fool being a fucking fool is all you are, cunt.

Re: Copies Tesla???; really?

[WindBourne]

Please provide a link that shows that MB has been going with the same tech as Tesla and it has to be residential. Because if that is true, then it means that this story is a total lie by Daimler.

Re: Copies Tesla???; really?

[antiperimetaparalogo]

I don't have a link* and i meant Daimler actually (not exactly MB), plus with "same tech" i meant Li-ion generaly, but such packs are provided (i know for sure from its defence wing - note: some are the same thing as this new Tesla's "residential" type...).
* actually, TFA (that i had not read before i wrote my first comment... surprise!) mention Daimler's ACCUmotive (note: i am not sure that provides the packs of the Daimler's *defence* wing)

I want to make clear that i never intented to claim Daimler's products are better (i would not be suprised if Daimler becomes a customer of Tesla), but this "Copies Tesla" title was rediculus - we have them in special military equipment for some years now.

space efficient

[DrYak]

In Japan and Hawaii power companies are installing grid scale batteries. {...} Ideal for smoothing renewable sources.

And I might add: easier for such (relatively) smaller islands like Hawaii which can't afford lots hydroelectric dam due to limited amount of mountains (compared to the Alps here around, or compared to Japan)