Slashdot Mirror
Companies Are Using California Homes As Batteries To Power the Grid (qz.com)
"Companies like Tesla and SunRun are starting to bid on utility contracts that would allow them to string together dozens or hundreds of systems that act as an enormous reserve to balance the flow of electricity on the grid," reports Quartz. "Doing so would accelerate the grid's transformation from 20th century hub-and-spoke architecture to a transmission network moving electricity among thousands or millions of customers who generate and store their own power." From the report: In theory, networked home-solar-and-battery systems, acting in coordination over a single geographical area, could replace things like natural gas "peaker" plants need to help support the grid on a moment's notice. But it's an open question whether it makes financial sense. Kamath says renewable mandates could keep home solar-storage solutions for the grid going for a while, but the idea will have to prove itself on the market, perhaps by aggregating large areas, if it wants to seriously compete with existing energy assets.
SunRun told investors in 2017 that its pilot programs suggest it could competitively generate $2,000 worth of services by managing electricity flow back to the grid. The company has recently dropped its combative stance with utilities dragging their feet on accepting home solar. Instead, it's pursuing cooperation with the utilities now, in hopes of selling them home-based power. That would allow it grab a chunk of the billions being spent on modernizing the grid. "We don't want to be in a position of building two competing infrastructures," SunRun's Jurich said.
SunRun told investors in 2017 that its pilot programs suggest it could competitively generate $2,000 worth of services by managing electricity flow back to the grid. The company has recently dropped its combative stance with utilities dragging their feet on accepting home solar. Instead, it's pursuing cooperation with the utilities now, in hopes of selling them home-based power. That would allow it grab a chunk of the billions being spent on modernizing the grid. "We don't want to be in a position of building two competing infrastructures," SunRun's Jurich said.
please don't come here.
Won't be a problem.
A big part of me is afraid this will simply game the market rather than add predictability to pricing, although that is arguably is inevitable. I would much prefer a rate sheet that is easier to understand the implications of use in order to better allow proactive demand-side management. Too many things are grossly inefficient with reactive load management.
But, I don’t know an easy solution to the current ramp-rate profile without batteries and punitive rate structures.
Also leading the the US in people being homeless with little attempt to do anything about it. Yea keep on leading.
They would have to compensate the home owners for the wear-and-tear on their batteries. And if you can make it work financially with small systems then you can do it cheaper per kwh on a large scale in a consolidated facility. Just do that.
Anything you can do, your utility can do cheaper.
California... where people think mountains top out at 25 meters.
California... where Hollywood is a species.
California... they're "trying real hard".
California... not "technically" a virus.
In a world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king--and the two-eyed man is a heretic.
You always need to ask who it makes financial sense for. It certainly makes financial sense for Tesla and the politicians they lobby.
Taxes here in California are high, but they're worth it. Plus, states like Texas just make up the difference with fees, tolls, property taxes, etc. And after you pay all those fees, tolls, property taxes, etc, you're still in goddamn Texas.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Where have you been in California? There's none of that where I live.
"affordability" rankings are nonsense. Hamburger helper is more affordable than filet mignon, but you're eating packaged starch instead of a nice steak. I've lived in Houston and I live in California. When I count the fact that I save a lot of money on utilities (I don't have to heat or cool my house) and health care (my health insurance costs went way down) and food (groceries are about 30% cheaper in California than in Houston, plus I'm in a beautiful place instead of an ugly, polluted one, I figure it's a great deal.
I've lived in Texas. It's a shithole state. It's a place where their most famous military battle is one where the Texans got massacred and their state bird is a mosquito. It's terribly polluted and the state politicians in Texas are so corrupt it would make a Chicago alderman blush (I'm from Chicago, so I know).
You are welcome on my lawn.