Slashdot Mirror


Orange County Developer To Install Tesla Batteries In Two Dozen Buildings (computerworld.com)

Lucas123 writes: The Irvine Company, a Newport Beach-based real estate developer that is a dominant landlord in Orange County, plans to install Tesla commercial batteries in two dozen of its buildings around Irvine Spectrum and John Wayne Airport. The project is the first of its kind of that size. The batteries will charge during non-peak hours and distribute power to the buildings during peak hours, a process that's expected to save the developer up to 10% of its energy costs or about $1 million a year.

89 comments

  1. Re:Great by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Any why Tesla Batteries? There are other batteries out there (like Alevo) that cost less and are made to handle a greater amount of cycling for this very purpose. This is just a big PR 'look at how wonderful we are' boondoggle.

    They'll probably get federal tax money.. that is what really pisses me off. Give my money to some person in need instead.

  2. Not so fast... by Firethorn · · Score: 4, Informative

    $30M to install? I'm seeing roughly $600k, at $25k per pop, per building.

    The thing to remember about commercial building electric rates is that you not only pay a charge based on electrical usage, but also a 'peak power demand' surcharge. By reducing any peaks in power usage, it saves money on their bills.

    If it saves anywhere near $1M/year, a roughly $1M investment is a foolish bargain to refuse.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
    1. Re:Not so fast... by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      They certainly are vague enough on the math. I suppose they could mean $30 for 24 buildings, then save $1M per building, but that makes a lot of rosy assumptions. When the details are purposely blurry, be skeptical as hell.

    2. Re:Not so fast... by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 2

      I think the $25K figure is per battery, not per building, as 100 kWh doesn't seem liket nearly enough to offset power usage for any decent sized commercial building. So, each building will likely have multiple batteries, from what I could see in the images shown. I'd bet on that $30 million figure being accurate.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    3. Re: Not so fast... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who cares what it costs. This is an investment in the future.

    4. Re: Not so fast... by TWX · · Score: 1

      I care about what things cost and their future investment potential.

      I've seen lots of systems installed in the name of the future that were dead-ends. There had been an attempt at a proprietary metro wireless network here about fifteen years ago. There were little transceivers up on the light poles. The system went bust, but there were no thousands of these little radios bolted to poles that did nothing but help the poles rust faster as the paint was disturbed.

      Everything added to a building is a tradeoff, as the more stuff added, the more room committed to it in the central plant or telecom plant, and the less space available for occupancy. Sometimes it makes sense to leave room for expansion in those mechanical spaces, but sometimes it really does not. What I think will happen is that since the Tesla name is hot right now, they can probably place these battery units in an area that isn't obscured from the tenants, basically taking some of their space in the process, without hearing much in the way of complaints from the tenants for it. As others have pointed out there are plenty of battery systems in existence already, but the Tesla one is the cool one, the Tesla one is the one that people won't recoil from. Doesn't matter if the others are actually better technology if the Telsa system is the one that people will accept intruding into their space.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    5. Re: Not so fast... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Found the Democrat.

    6. Re:Not so fast... by EdwardFurlong · · Score: 1

      How I read it as well. 25k per battery. The rest is probably for install costs. My first thought is spending 30 million to save 1 million a year seems pretty stupid. Who knows maybe they are getting a discount, at the very least they are getting their company name all over the place. My only other thought is maybe once they get all the initial install costs paid for adding more batteries might be easier. I do wish tings like this gave some better numbers, it always ends up being a guessing game, I'd hate to think so many businesses are that bad at math, unless they have other motivations.

    7. Re:Not so fast... by TheWindBlows · · Score: 1

      Right, and we're back to square one with saving money. So-Cal charges about %20 more during peak usage. The average yearly cost per kW is ~20 cents. Peak hours are from noon-to-six, only 60 percent of business hours or less. A $25K battery will be capable of offsetting ~100kWh of usage for 10 warranted years (ignoring the obvious battery decay). Do the math and the battery will only "SAVE" ~8K, but in reality you're losing $17K

    8. Re:Not so fast... by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 2

      Yes, it's $25k per battery, each battery can store 100kWh, and they are saying that all of the installed batteries will be able to offset 10MW of reserve capacity. However specs for the battery seem to be a bit sparse so I don't know how fast the battery can discharge or even the physical size of the battery. The article mentioned that the batteries at the first site would take up five parking spaces (I can't see one being that large).

      The home models provide a continuous 5kW of power but that would be too low for this one. If we assume that they want to almost discharge their batteries during the peak period and leave enough for a short backup period let's guess seven hours for a full discharge which would give us a continuous 14kW power, approximately. So then they would be ordering on the order of 700 batteries which works out to $17.5M leaving the rest for installation.

    9. Re:Not so fast... by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 2

      I was thinking that the $1M a year was probably the savings just from buying electricity off-peak and using it on-peak. The article mentions that the electricity supplier would then be able to ask them to switch to the batteries when there was very high demand. Normally companies that do this, or shut down some equipment, get rebates so that probably is on top of the figure quoted. And I'm sure that they are getting a good price with all of this publicity they are generating for Tesla.

      But yes, a 30 year payback isn't normally something a company would do. So either the owner is an eco-warrior that's trying to prevent fossil fuel peak power generation plants from running as much or there's some accounting that isn't being shared.

    10. Re:Not so fast... by TheWindBlows · · Score: 1

      Looks like I used the wrong data off PG&Es website. SCE charges up to 40% more during the summer period. Though that at best means you're still out $13K.

    11. Re:Not so fast... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      They certainly are vague enough on the math

      The numbers in TFA make no sense. The units are $25,000 each and store 100 kwh. At peak, power is about 12c/kwhr. Off peak is about 6c/kwhr. So, at most, these units are going to save $6 per day.

      $6 * 365 * 20 units = $43,800 savings per year. That is no where close to "a million dollars". If it costs $25,000 * 20 units = $500k to install, then the ROI is 8.8%, which is not bad when bank loans are typically 4% or less. So this looks like a decent investment, but TFA is so muddled it is hard to say for sure.

    12. Re: Not so fast... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Who cares what it costs. This is an investment in the future.

      Let me guess: You support Bernie Sanders for president. Am I right?

    13. Re:Not so fast... by Chuq · · Score: 1

      The Powerpack (100kWh) retails for US$25,000? Unless this is a mistake, this makes Powerpacks a very good deal, considering the 7kWh Powerwall retails for US$3,500 and the Powerpack is more or less 15 Powerwalls in a single enclosure.

      --
      - Chuq
    14. Re:Not so fast... by afidel · · Score: 1

      Peak rates for commercial users in Southern California Edison territory are $3.641/kwhr (!) at 5PM on days where the downtown LA peak temp is >=95F. Even 85-90F days are a ridiculous $0.6205/kwhr, midnight rates on those same days are $.0481 so it's not hard to see how shifting a few thousand killowatt hours per month during the summer could add up to a million over their properties.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    15. Re:Not so fast... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So-Cal charges about %20 more during peak usage. The average yearly cost per kW is ~20 cents

      they would save substantially more money per year by moving to the midwest or somewhere else where electric rates are half that or less (our rates are just a little under half your quoted southern california rates, and our taxes and fees added onto our utility bills is also most likley much less, too)..

      besides doubling (and then some) their savings in electricity costs alone, they'd also save in other utility expenses, taxes, payroll costs, and just about everything else. low cost of living, low payroll costs, low property costs, and we have water, too, lots of it.

    16. Re:Not so fast... by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Plus demand charges per peak kW, which are often as important as the kWh charges.

    17. Re:Not so fast... by Khyber · · Score: 2

      That still makes PowerPacks a horrible deal.

      http://www.alibaba.com/product...

      I just finished an e-mail exchange with that company. I negotiated $75 a pop for the 12V 200Ah Gel SLA batteries when you get minimum order quantity of 50, which would be needed to match the PowerPack's storage levels.

      $3,750. For the price of one PowerWall, I can match the PowerPack's storage capacity using SLA batteries. At the largest dimensions for the battery, I could run 50 (10 stacked vertically x 5 stacks) in a roughly 8.5' tall x 6.5' wide x 1' deep enclosure with self-powered gas/heat ventilation, done safely. That's roughly the same size of the cabinets currently used to house PowerPacks in Jackson, Florida at a refrigeration plant, except 1/2 to 1/3 as deep.

      The SLA is also deep-cycle and can withstand serious drain far better than Lithium cells. It can also handle higher peak current draw (though not as much as if I were to go with straight non-gel SLA.) The lithium cells have an advantage in that they have better charge cycle life (roughly 25% on average) but they're also more sensitive to temperature than SLA, which in good ol' hot SoCal is quite often an issue.

      So currently, a PowerPack utilizes more space, costs ~7x more, AND it can't handle the amperage load the bank of SLAs can, plus there's the issue of thermal control.

      I wonder where the bean-counters and brains were on this one.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    18. Re:Not so fast... by MattskEE · · Score: 2

      PowerPack has built in charge controller and cooling, plus a warranty and guaranteed specifications. If you roll your own solution with bare batteries it might be cheaper but it will consume your time, talents, and you will be the one responsible for warrantying it.

    19. Re:Not so fast... by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Cooling is required for the PowerWall because of the lithium battery chemistry being heat intolerant. SLA doesn't have anywhere near that issue and can operate/charge in much higher temperature ranges. Charge controller is cheap. These batteries have a warranty and guaranteed specs as well.

      I've got an SLA+solar array in a warehouse in Memphis. It's been in operation almost 15 years without issue and from the steward's last report the system still maintains about 85% maximum capacity. I can build and install systems and provide the warranty work if needed if I built it myself. Even with the cost of my labor and a from-grid charge controller (assuming these bans aren't going to be solar-tied and charge from the grid directly) you're still only looking at about $4,500 total install cost.

      And then you can have me replace that in 20 years.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    20. Re:Not so fast... by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      Still, batteries cost about $3,000 for every $1 worth of electricity they store. If we cycle them every day and save 10% on the stored power, it will take 82 years to break even. But then, the battery will wear out within ten years. And then there's the opportunity cost to consider for the capital spent up front.

    21. Re:Not so fast... by TheWindBlows · · Score: 1

      Right, that's what I was calculating. The energy has to come from somewhere. The most money you could save per kWh is by taking power from off-peak and using it at on-peak times. Which is ~40% savings during the summer and ~20% during the winter, but those savings will never pay for the battery because the cost per kWh is too high.

  3. Peak-Shaving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a great example of peak shaving.

    In a nutshell, peak shaving is the process of reducing the amount of energy purchased from the utility company during peak hours when the charges are highest. Many businesses are paying for their electricity consumption on a time-of-use basis. Peak demand charges typically apply to electricity consumed from noon to 6:00 p.m. while lesser charges apply to the rest of the day. This rate trend mirrors demand, which typically peaks during these hours of the day. The great thing about solar electricity panels is that they produce most of their energy during these peak hours. Your business can offset their highest costing electricity with solar and only pay for the lower costing energy used during off peak times.

    What isn't mentioned in the quote is another way that this saves money, which works even if your electric company doesn't offer a discount during off-peak hours. The transmission charges on an electric bill are typically based on the prior year's peak usage number times the rate for your transmission-based charges (this is true in the PJM and MISO footprints, I can't vouch for other areas). So if you can reduce your maximum usage kilowatts in a given year, the following year your charges will be lower.

  4. Re:Great by ajzimm3rman · · Score: 0

    Not only that but, how will we dispose of them? Send them back to China?

  5. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where does it say taxpayer money is being used? Article mentions a commercial developer. And the Powerwall should last 5000 cycles, I can't find anything specific to the Powerpack though.

  6. Re:Great by Vairon · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Irvine Company is a commercial company not the government. What Orange County taxes are you talking about?

  7. Re:Great by j-beda · · Score: 1

    I'm sure Orange County residents are fine with wise use of tax money. It will cost over 30 million to install, it might save up to a million per year.

    How long is that battery life?

    How is this a use of tax money? A private company installing something that they think will save them money? Or maybe they are reselling electricity to their tenants and this will generate revenue. Of course I did not read the article very closely, so I could be wrong. Please correct me if I am.

  8. Re: Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But it is an investment in the future just like paying more for a Prius when an Echo is cheaper to buy and cheaper to repair.

  9. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/teslas-closed-loop-battery-recycling-program

  10. Re: Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And much cheaper to operate. You can buy a heck of a lot of gas for what I just paid for the new battery for my Prius.

  11. Re:Great by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 1

    I'm sure Orange County residents are fine with wise use of tax money.

    Indeed, it would be much better spent on things like improving reading comprehension.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  12. Re: Great by TWX · · Score: 1

    And much cheaper to operate. You can buy a heck of a lot of gas for what I just paid for the new battery for my Prius.

    I've always looked at that tradeoff. We're thinking about replacing my wife's car within the next couple of years. Saw a '95 Buick Roadmaster with 30,000 miles on it for like $7,000. I did the math and estimated high on the cost of fuel (which penalizes the Buick more than a new 300, for example) and it would take something like 140,000 miles to hit the break-even point before a more efficient car costs less.

    Admittedly, there is a reduction in safety equipment in the Buick, but that Roadmaster is a very nice sedan for that kind of money.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  13. Re:Great by drnb · · Score: 2

    You don't think they'll get huge tax gifts? If not, then more power to them.

    There are probably incentives from the local power company, also a private company not a government entity.

    If there are tax breaks they would be state based, not county based, and would be little different from taxpayers subsidizing every solar panel a homeowner puts on their roof, etc.

    "More power", yes. Because during peak hours where these batteries are going to be active is when buildings in Orange County have experience the occasional power outages. So reducing their draw during these hours is a benefit to the larger Orange County community.

  14. how long before SCE adjust there billing metric by Brigadier · · Score: 1

    I've noticed these coming a common topic amongst developers in Southern California. I've had a few ask me about this, just this week. Assuming this isn't just a flavor of the week (what happened to bloom boxes) my question is will the power company always tune there billing in such a way that makes this profitable. Realistically the buildings will utilize the same amount of power, but the peak loads will level out. in short Edison gets less money for the same kilo watts. How long will they let this fly before they begin adjusting there billing metric.

    1. Re:how long before SCE adjust there billing metric by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the benefit for Edison is in the additional energy storage capacity. Except in places with pumped hydro, there is essentially no storage in the grid. Most traditional power plants cannot be turned on/off quickly, so it puts the utility in a bind when demand spikes or when renewable sources fluctuate. The agreement likely includes terms favorable to the utility such that they can reduce their peak capacity by offloading it to low demand times. As we see more and more solar / wind adoption, utilities will need to be adopting more grid storage.

    2. Re:how long before SCE adjust there billing metric by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      In the minds of the utility, by getting customers to shift usage off of peak demand times, or lower the total demand, they don't need to spend money to upgrade generating or transmission / distribution capacity, which is why their billing scheme encourages it.

    3. Re:how long before SCE adjust there billing metric by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      likely includes terms favorable to the utility such that they can reduce their peak capacity by offloading it to low demand times.

      This is interesting. If you had enough distributed arbitrarily efficient storage capacity then all sources could run at or near their peak efficiency by running for set periods. Of course reality isn't remotely that simple. For instance one argument against only nuclear power is it is unsuited to fast changes in load. With enough batteries you could, in theory, have a power system that was all current generation nuclear plants. Add some logic and you could automatically turn off everything non critical when power is lost, and have basic reserve power in emergencies. I.E. you could perhaps reserve say 5kW per house to at least run the refrigerator, a few lights, and either the stove or a single electric heater.

    4. Re:how long before SCE adjust there billing metric by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      The eventual direction will be real-time pricing, where batteries will be very effective. Right now though, Orange County has a power deficit which means any tricks the utility company can pull off help stabilize things.

      Real-time pricing will eventually make the hours between 1-2 hours before sunset and 8-9PM be most expensive. This will kill the PV incentives.

    5. Re:how long before SCE adjust there billing metric by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      I've noticed these coming a common topic amongst developers in Southern California. I've had a few ask me about this, just this week. Assuming this isn't just a flavor of the week (what happened to bloom boxes) my question is will the power company always tune there billing in such a way that makes this profitable. Realistically the buildings will utilize the same amount of power, but the peak loads will level out. in short Edison gets less money for the same kilo watts. How long will they let this fly before they begin adjusting there billing metric.

      As they bring on more Solar and Wind Power, the bulk of their generation power will be available during the day. As we level the power consumption more and more, eventually we are putting more demand at night on a system that is able to generate more power during the day. So as we start shifting more power to wind and solar, we will eventually see peak pricing being during the nighttime hours, especially if everybody charges their EV at night.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    6. Re:how long before SCE adjust there billing metric by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then as we find we overgenerate during the day, we'll take that peak production and store it for the night, matching our load to our supply. Just like we do at the moment.

      Or do you think we're too dumb to realise we can do the same change again?

    7. Re:how long before SCE adjust there billing metric by gurps_npc · · Score: 1
      Never. Peak load is a huge problem for the power industry. Due to the economics of power generation, we have a huge problem generating power when needed. Basically, power needs shift CONSTANTLY and we have to change how much we generate on the fly, and that is not cheap.

      The best power sources tend to be variable themselves - solar, wind, etc. Solar for example does not work at all during the night. We don't control them. The second best power sources tend to involve huge infrastructure that are expensive to start and or stop.

      It makes a ton of sense to have batteries collect power at distribution points and even out the flows.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  15. as long as no one else gets the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or the whole "off peak" thing will disappear. the grid will run at constant, and increasing, capacity full time. the first casualty however, will be any cost benefits for "off peak" charging.

    The early adopters can greenwash and maybe make a case though.

    1. Re:as long as no one else gets the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think a level load-curve would save a lot of money all-around. If they could ensure that levelness less transmission and peaking infrastructure would be needed. Gas peaker units are typically more expensive to run, that's why they don't get dispatched until energy market prices rise high enough. Less facilities would be needed and the intermittency of renewables could be balanced more easily.

  16. Re:Great by Myria · · Score: 2

    The Irvine Company is a commercial company not the government. What Orange County taxes are you talking about?

    Around here, The Irvine Company's power is such that it might as well be the government.

    --
    "Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
  17. Re:Great by PRMan · · Score: 1

    For those that don't know. The Irvine Company IS the city of Irvine, CA. It's one of the largest cities in Orange County, CA.

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  18. Is this real? by tsotha · · Score: 1

    Do the numbers really work for this? If they do, why isn't the power company buying up Tesla's production for the foreseeable future?

    1. Re:Is this real? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AEP will be buying batteries.

      Mr. Powers said he sees the small commercial and residential markets being the first to benefit from battery scale-up. In an extreme example, he said, AEP’s Texas subsidiary helped develop a 4-megawatt storage battery to serve customers in Presidio, Texas, who experienced chronic power outages because a single, 60-mile transmission line extended to their town.

      “What that does is provides a great deal of flexibility in terms of protecting the customers from price spikes,” as well as outages, Mr. Powers said. “What’s far off is the coupling of large batteries with power plants. What’s not so far off is helping the individual customer manage their energy needs.”

      Indeed, the long-term vision for battery developers is to change the way consumers use energy. Batteries solve the problem of mismatched times of excess generation — early afternoon for solar, or sufficiently breezy days for wind — and times of peak demand — typically in the early evening for consumers.

      The idea of buying cheap energy off-peak then selling back on-peak will become viable as prices of batteries come down. If utilities could pass on the costs of battery grid storage to the ratepayers I'm sure they would be very happy to do so, as they can typically get a standard profit margin guaranteed on such investments. I don't know what the threshold price would be, but it's something to keep an eye on.

    2. Re:Is this real? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to start somewhere. Perhaps they are considering buying more for the future, but want to check if the numbers would work out for them.

    3. Re:Is this real? by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      Do the numbers really work for this?

      I have no idea.

      If they do, why isn't the power company buying up Tesla's production for the foreseeable future?

      How much money do you think Tesla would demand in return for shutting down its electric car business, given that it is an electric car company? I'm guessing it would be enough that a power company interested in battery storage would be better off finding their battery supply elsewhere.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    4. Re:Is this real? by ledow · · Score: 1

      Notice that it only mentions savings on electricity. While this is indeed a long-term saving, it's not taking account of anything to do with the purchase price and maintenance of the system.

      I can save you 100% on your electricity for the next year. You just have to buy my huge-arse battery, and pay for a "recharge" once a year. Cost: More than you pay for electricity in a year.

    5. Re:Is this real? by jecblackpepper · · Score: 1

      Mr. Powers said ....

      Now that is a wonderful example of nominative determinism.

  19. Re:Great by drnb · · Score: 1

    The Irvine Company is a commercial company not the government. What Orange County taxes are you talking about?

    Around here, The Irvine Company's power is such that it might as well be the government.

    Worse, more like a homeowner's association, which kind of makes sense since they are nearly everyone's landlord. Here are the three acceptable shades of beige you may paint your buildings. Here are the two types of outdoor metal tables and chairs you have outside your restaurant. You may think I am joking ... but that just tells us you have not visited Irvine.

  20. Are peak hours more expensive? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    If not, this is a waste, like changing dollars to euros and back again. You will consume more on the long run.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:Are peak hours more expensive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In energy markets the cost during peak hours is typically high enough that pumped water storage facilities can make money by buying electricity off-peak to pump the water uphill, then releasing the water on-peak to sell at the higher prices. This is profitable even though you lose energy in the process.

    2. Re: Are peak hours more expensive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be a dope.

    3. Re:Are peak hours more expensive? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Yes. Economics 101 - Supply and Demand.

  21. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are not the city, but they do control the city.

  22. Re:Great by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

    The reason there are incentives for Orange County is the decommissioning of San Onofre nuclear power plant. That area is now short peak capacity especially, but also base load to a degree. The transmission lines out of San Onofre primarily feed to Orange County and don't have nearly as much import capacity.

    Batteries are cost effective at $200/kW. I assume the incentives cover the delta in cost. Chilled water or ice thermal storage is much cheaper, but Irvine Company has a lot of buildings without chilled water systems (although not so much in that particular area).

    It is an inefficient solution though; on-site generation would be much more cost effective and energy efficient.

  23. Re: Great by mattack2 · · Score: 1

    OK, it only has 30K miles on it.. but even just due to being old, won't it have _some_ more maintenance than a newer car?

  24. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    more power to them.

    As it were.

  25. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Give my money to some person in need instead.

    Can't. They're poor, they deserve to suffer, it's God's Will.

  26. Re:Great by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    You don't think they'll get huge tax gifts?

    In Orange County? Where the airport is name after John Wayne, and Ronald Reagan is considered a demigod? I don't think so.

  27. Re: Great by TWX · · Score: 1

    About four years ago I bought a '95 Impala SS with 6,421 miles on it. It still has its original belt and hoses. The LT1 engine powers the water pump off of the snout of the cam, no belt. The cooling fans are electric. I'm up to about 30,000 miles on the Impala, no significant problems. Had to replace a broken antiswaybar bushing on one of the end links. It'll need a new power antenna, it's stuck. That's the bulk of it.

    I expect that a Roadmaster (same car under the sheet metal) would behave much the same way.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  28. Re:Great by dave562 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Because during peak hours where these batteries are going to be active is when buildings in Orange County have experience the occasional power outages. So reducing their draw during these hours is a benefit to the larger Orange County community.

    You are spot on with this. As an employee of a company who is in an Irvine Company building that is going to get these batteries, I can attest to the power outages and mandatory rationing that we are subject to. They are not too invasive and so far have amounted to little more than no building A/C after 5pm. I had to contend with much worse rationing working at a non-profit in downtown LA who had heavily discounted power.

  29. Peak Hours!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So if everyone starts charging their electrical storage devices (batteries, cars, etc.) during off-peak hours, how long before the off-peak hours become peak hours?

  30. Why Tesla batteries? by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

    I mean, they make sense in a car, because they are light, but for a building a lead-acid battery would make more sense, wouldn't it?

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    1. Re:Why Tesla batteries? by swb · · Score: 1

      If "in a building" translates to "a lot of space" then nickel-iron batteries would make the most sense, since they have a very long lifespan and tolerate deep discharges. But I think their max discharge rate is lower than others, meaning you'd need a larger space for the array.

      I think lead acid would suffer from similar issues due to the need to keep maximum discharge depth above 50%.

      Lithium batteries have a good discharge profile and take less space.

  31. Re: Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And your supermodel wife's shoes.

    Right.

    You need new batteries on a Prius roughly every 100-150,000 miles. And the old battery is still worth nearly half the new one because it is recycled to a new one cheaply which is then sold on at the full price.

  32. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since nuclear can't produce for peak, the loss of the nuclear plant cannot be the cause if lack of peak is the problem.

  33. But Why In Florida by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last time I went through Orange County I didn't see a single Tesla.

    Are they sure they have the right market for this?

    Us Floridians can get easily confused, what with the heat and all,

  34. Does Elon Musk own Dice? by tomhath · · Score: 1

    Seems we get a slashvertisement every day pimping one or another of his businesses - Tesla, SpaceX, SolarCity.

    1. Re:Does Elon Musk own Dice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if not, hipster nerds love to fellate him because of his name alone, plus he's not American, so you get the liberal coast-dwellers fawning on him as well.

  35. Re:Great by tomhath · · Score: 1

    It is the cause when your gas turbines are being used to supply base load instead of topping off at peak.

  36. Re:Great by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    I grew up there. The Irvine Company owns Orange County, so buying those Powerwalls is for them like us dropping by Frys for a pack of AA cells.

  37. Re:Great by JimSadler · · Score: 2

    It is really wicked that the wealthiest state in the nation can not provide quality, electrical services. One would think that California would have by far the best electrical supply in the nation. God bless Tesla! The Tesla organization is doing wonderful work.

  38. Batteries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But I thought we'd 3D print fusion reactors with helium-3 from the Moon!??

  39. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    It is really wicked that the wealthiest state in the nation can not provide quality, electrical services. One would think that California would have by far the best electrical supply in the nation.

    Replying as AC because I modded the parent.

    Is it really that big of a mystery? Which political party has ruled California for the majority of the last few decades? And which political party refuses to build new power plants?

  40. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ronald Reagan? The ACTOR??

  41. Re:Great by chispito · · Score: 1

    Wish I had mod points. Your comment is not only insightful, it is quite understated. That company has a hand in everything in south Orange County.

    --
    The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
  42. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nuclear produces around the clock, which includes the peak portion of the day.

  43. Re:-- JEW distraction trolls -- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The jew trolls are most the comments. A lot of the comments don't even say anything but they are voted up. Very obvious.

  44. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Po-tay-toe, po-tah-toe.