Electric Ireland solar panels & EV charging?

BoatMad

loyatemu wrote: »

family of 5 in a 4-bed semi - our electricity usage (excluding the standing and PSO charges) is only a little over €500 a year.
I reckon we spend no more than 70c a day on heating water (gas boiler) so maybe €240 per year on that.

how much of this could we realistically save by putting a PV system on the roof - we do a lot of washing which I guess could be mostly done during the day, but don't have a tumble dryer (anyway, on dry sunny days we'd hang the clothes outdoors). Even if we saved 50% of the costs above, the payback would still be 13 years (and 50% seems very optimistic).

I would LOVE to see how your bill is 500 a year , the pso and standing charges would be around 340 , suggesting you are using 150 quid in units or around 600 units a year

I find that very hard to beleive

Ps oh I see you exclude the pso and standing

Still extrneky good going , well below average

BoatMad

loyatemu wrote: »

family of 5 in a 4-bed semi - our electricity usage (excluding the standing and PSO charges) is only a little over €500 a year.
I reckon we spend no more than 70c a day on heating water (gas boiler) so maybe €240 per year on that.

how much of this could we realistically save by putting a PV system on the roof - we do a lot of washing which I guess could be mostly done during the day, but don't have a tumble dryer (anyway, on dry sunny days we'd hang the clothes outdoors). Even if we saved 50% of the costs above, the payback would still be 13 years (and 50% seems very optimistic).

How do you dry clothes in the winter ?

And yes as you've discovered at present solar PV is for affianadoes and the financially profligate

Shefwedfan

I pay 80 a month, flat rate based on my usage.

cnocbui

loyatemu wrote: »

family of 5 in a 4-bed semi - our electricity usage (excluding the standing and PSO charges) is only a little over ?500 a year.
I reckon we spend no more than 70c a day on heating water (gas boiler) so maybe ?240 per year on that.

how much of this could we realistically save by putting a PV system on the roof - we do a lot of washing which I guess could be mostly done during the day, but don't have a tumble dryer (anyway, on dry sunny days we'd hang the clothes outdoors). Even if we saved 50% of the costs above, the payback would still be 13 years (and 50% seems very optimistic).

You must have the best insulated house in the country. I just had a delivery of heating kerosene and it was €476. I'd need 3 of those a year, minimum. 4 Bedroom house, block with cavity and roof insulation.

jimmycrackcorm

cnocbui wrote:

Without a very practical and cost effective energy storage technology - which we don't have - Solar and wind power have to be fully backed by conventional electricity generation capacity, meaning you have two complete sets of energy generation infrastructure and have to pay for both. It's wasteful and stupid. Idealism triumphing over reality.

We do have a.cost effective energy storage technology that could be rolled out more. We've had it since 1974.

Have a guess what it is?

KCross

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

We do have a.cost effective energy storage technology that could be rolled out more. We've had it since 1974.

Have a guess what it is?

Turlough Hill

BoatMad

Shefwedfan wrote: »

I pay 80 a month, flat rate based on my usage.

Me too , 4 bed detached , oil fired , 1997 build , cat B , small house though

That includes the EV charging from typically 30 % to full every week day night

But there just the two of us , all washing and dishwasher fine at night rate and with us not at home cdurung the day

antoinolachtnai

BoatMad wrote: »

Yes while the new powerwall warranty is largely junk since it does not set limits on battery degradation. , I was just addressing the poster comments about chsrge cycles

Here the applicable piece

"
Tesla Motors, Inc. warrants that your Powerwall will be free from defects for ten years following the date it was installed for the first time. If you only use your Powerwall for self-consumption of solar energy generated by an onsite array and for storing that solar energy for use as backup power, there is no limit on the number of times that you can cycle your battery in this ten year period."

Note , " no limit " to cycles

Li industry is largely moving away from cycling issues as these have not found to particularly pertinent in Li aging

The point is that the extent of your use of a battery will make a difference to its life. If you use your battery to run your house as well as for transport, then it is going to reduce its resale value. I cannot see how this can be avoided.

BoatMad

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The point is that the extent of your use of a battery will make a difference to its life. If you use your battery to run your house as well as for transport, then it is going to reduce its resale value. I cannot see how this can be avoided.

As I have said and is borne out by the Tesla comment, cycles on Li have little effect on degradation, calendar life has more so

Hence a well used but relatively young powerwall, is actually better then a little used but older one. a little used Li battery that is old should have a lower resale battery then a well used younger one ( however this fact is often lost on people , who confuse usage with degradation )

Age is everything with LI

loyatemu

BoatMad wrote: »

I would LOVE to see how your bill is 500 a year , the pso and standing charges would be around 340 , suggesting you are using 150 quid in units or around 600 units a year

if you actually read my post you'll see I said it was 500 excluding the standing and PSO.

cnocbui wrote: »

You must have the best insulated house in the country. I just had a delivery of heating kerosene and it was €476. I'd need 3 of those a year, minimum. 4 Bedroom house, block with cavity and roof insulation.

I didn't say anything about heating, which is gas fired and costs a fortune, but PV won't do anything for that.

How do you dry clothes in the winter ?

clothes horse + dehumidifier. We do have a washer/dryer but the dryer bit only gets used for sheets.

BoatMad

loyatemu wrote: »

if you actually read my post you'll see I said it was 500 excluding the standing and PSO.

i did see that later

Im at 80 a month inclusing charging the EV every weekday night, but theres just the two of us

Energy average for a 4 bed , 4 occupant house is 1800 a year !

loyatemu

BoatMad wrote: »

i did see that later

Im at 80 a month inclusing charging the EV every weekday night, but theres just the two of us

Energy average for a 4 bed , 4 occupant house is 1800 a year !

well we have gas heating and the total gas+elec is close enough to that figure, but the bulk of that is heating.

BoatMad

loyatemu wrote: »

well we have gas heating and the total gas+elec is close enough to that figure, but the bulk of that is heating.

sorry I meant Energia average for electricity for that is 1800 a year

I heat with a combination of timber and oil, about 500 euros a year all in

loyatemu

BoatMad wrote: »

sorry I meant Energia average for electricity for that is 1800 a year

seems very high - what's using all the juice, tumble drier?

BoatMad

loyatemu wrote: »

seems very high - what's using all the juice, tumble drier?

yeah it seems high to me, but my last house with the kids and all , was running at about 350 per billing , so about " right " per their calculations, now Im down at 80 a month on average , well below Energia predictions

cnocbui

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

We do have a.cost effective energy storage technology that could be rolled out more. We've had it since 1974.

Have a guess what it is?

Flooding the countryside is such a green solution.

BoatMad

BoatMad wrote: »

As I have said and is borne out by the Tesla comment, cycles on Li have little effect on degradation, calendar life has more so

Hence a well used but relatively young powerwall, is actually better then a little used but older one. a little used Li battery that is old should have a lower resale battery then a well used younger one ( however this fact is often lost on people , who confuse usage with degradation )

Age is everything with LI

That's not what the makers of the cells say, yes calendar life will have an effect and also the charging currents and discharge currents and cycle life and including temperature.

A battery cell is usually rated to 70%, i.e 1000 cycles to 70% provided it's used within tolerance such as temperature and C rate.

A Tesla battery might not be impacted much by cycle life because it will rarely see a full cycle or close to full cycle very unlike a leaf owner or any other EV with 20-30 Kwh worth of storage.

BoatMad

Deleted User wrote: »

That's not what the makers of the cells say, yes calendar life will have an effect and also the charging currents and discharge currents and cycle life and including temperature.

A battery cell is usually rated to 70%, i.e 1000 cycles to 70% provided it's used within tolerance such as temperature and C rate.

A Tesla battery might not be impacted much by cycle life because it will rarely see a full cycle or close to full cycle very unlike a leaf owner or any other EV with 20-30 Kwh worth of storage.

I really hate when you decend into battery specs cause its clear you have actually no engineering understanding of actually specifying and using Li Cells and I get forced to trawl the science again


Heres a typically 18650 spec https://www.batteryspace.com/prod-specs/ICR18650NH-2200.pdf ( and before you say it , all Li is essentially the same within the chemical configuration , irrespective of size of battery)
Notice the only mention of charge discharge cycles , is 300 cycles must result in a greater then 80% retention in capacity , This is a typical spec, it does not mean that cycle life is specified, merely that its a test to prove the cell is functioning within spec.

It is not "rated to 70%, i.e 1000 cycles" its not that type of spec , you could find in this battery , that after 300 cycles, its at 95% , thats within spec

The fact remains , that as more and more life cycle knowledge builds up on high demand batteries, what you are finding is that warranties focus on Calendar Life and not on discharge recharge cycles or heat.

That doesnt mean these factors can be ignored but the data suggests that calendar life is a major factor and once the others remain within spec , they have less effect and this can be seen by changing warranties types away from usage and towards time.


This is borne out anecdotally , where high ,mileage Leafs, but over a relatively short lifetime , had very large mileages before they lost a bar, whereas other with much lower mileages but older cars lost bars on lower mileages

A Tesla battery might not be impacted much by cycle life because it will rarely see a full cycle or close to full cycle very unlike a leaf owner or any other EV with 20-30 Kwh worth of storage.

again studies show that mini cycles and major cycles has little difference in the degradation if Li cells, it doesnt really matter ( providing you avoid very low battery conditions, that you go from 100% to 30% or 70% to 30% in reality , th effect on life cycle is very limited often superseded by other effects

You need to see large format battery specs in the context of changing experiences based on usage patterns and data collection . YOU are seeing a move away from concern over usage cycles and more towards calendar life

( for example the Leaf warranty is not based on charge discharge cycles,)

cnocbui

BoatMad wrote: »

What a bizarre , uninformed and simply bonkets comment

Li-ion batteries start degrading and dying from the minute they are manufactured. Even if you don't use one at all it will typically have lost a significant proportion of it's capacity in 3 years. The only way to mitigate this, that I have come across, is to have them charged at about 50% capacity and then freeze them. Wholly impractical and of little point.

The trend for manufacturers, like Apple, to make Li-ion batteries not user replaceable seems like deliberate obsolescence, relying on the the failing capacity characteristic of Li batteries.

Have a look at the warranty for Tesla's much vaunted Powerwall:

In addition, this Limited Warranty does not cover (a) normal degradation of your Powerwall?s energy capacity over time

I wrote this on an 2012 Macbook Pro retina, which desperately needs a new battery, but at a replacement cost of 700 Euro in this country, I am rather put off. My previous Macbook had it's trackpad killed and was rendered dead by a Li battery that swelled.

If the constant degradation in capacity of Li batteries could be solved, they would be great. As it stands now, they are a PITA.

I think I am pretty well informed on Li batteries, thank you.

KCross

cnocbui wrote: »

Li-ion batteries start degrading and dying from the minute they are manufactured. Even if you don't use one at all it will typically have lost a significant proportion of it's capacity in 3 years.

What is your definition of significant?

Plenty of 3yr old EV's out there with very little degradation.

Waste of time, BoatMad has some engineering qualification and automatically makes him an expert in Li batteries. BS, My Brother has an engineering masters and would not declare himself an expert in Li batteries or talk down to others like BoatMad.

cnocbui

30-50% loss in capacity over 3 years seems not uncommon and would be a good fit for my own personal experince with 3 laptops and several phones.

How is the remaining capacity of these EV batteries being determined? By charging to full and driving till it stops moving and recording the distance or by relying on the instrument read-outs? If it's the latter - pffft!

I have a 2012 Nissan Leaf with under 36k miles and the "24 kwh" battery back only charges to 17 kWh at 100%. Nissan claims this is perfectly fine and have closed my case. First of all the LEAF's 24 kWh only charges to 22 kWh brand new. Does Tesla do this? Nissan guarantees you have at least 8 bars on the right hand side (there are two sets of bars if you look closely) not the actual percent degredation but what they do not tell you is that all bars are not equal. I have 11 bars even though I can only charge to 17 kWh. Nissan will not replace any battery that has 9 or more bars within 5 years regardless of how much charge it holds. The first bar won't come off until over 10-15% of the battery is gone. To lose 4 bars the battery needs to degrade to 50-60% of capacity but Nissan will not publish this. Nissan LEAF has an 8yr 100k mile battery warranty like Tesla that only covers complete failure. If you can drive any miles theres no warranty issue. I am also not in a hot climate and I store the car in a garage that stays near room temp. So let's accept that no electric car really guarantees against degredation.

The bars on the left also aren't equal. From 12 bars to 2 bars is only 70% of the 17 kwh I have or 12 kwh. The last 2 bars have 30% of the kWh which adds to range anxiety. All bars should be equal for range or warranty. Its deceptive to switch between a top heavy or bottom heavy scale when it fits Nissan's agenda.

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1096801_tesla-model-s-battery-life-how-much-range-loss-for-electric-car-over-time

DrPhilG

cnocbui wrote: »

How is the remaining capacity of these EV batteries being determined? By charging to full and driving till it stops moving and recording the distance or by relying on the instrument read-outs? If it's the latter - pffft!

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1096801_tesla-model-s-battery-life-how-much-range-loss-for-electric-car-over-time

I have a 3 year old Leaf and according to the LeafSpy reports I'm at about 92% state of health. That's not the car's on screen display, it's taken from a bluetooth adaptor connected to the OBD port.

More importantly, I've been driving it myself for 2 of those 3 years and I'm still getting the same range now that I did when I started.

KCross

cnocbui wrote: »

30-50% loss in capacity over 3 years seems not uncommon and would be a good fit for my own personal experince with 3 laptops and several phones.

How is the remaining capacity of these EV batteries being determined? By charging to full and driving till it stops moving and recording the distance or by relying on the instrument read-outs? If it's the latter - pffft!

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1096801_tesla-model-s-battery-life-how-much-range-loss-for-electric-car-over-time

I think its largely understood that you cant compare a laptop battery to an EV battery.

I've seen some terrible phone batteries too but EV's don't seem to degrade at the same rate. I'm no battery expert but presumably the chemistries involved in the larger EV packs and better battery management systems have enabled them to survive longer.

Significant degradation after 3 years is just not happening in the EV world. There are two main ways to determine that.... range achieved from a charge and in the case of the Leaf the use of the LeafSpy app.

A survey of UK users is graphed here, see the graphs in the first post:
https://speakev.com/threads/the-batt...-thread.18923/


EDIT: Your own greencarreports link even agrees that significant degradation isn't happening particularly on the newer batteries (2013+)

Yeah batteries are improving due to chemistry changes and increased cycle life, resistance to heat etc etc and perhaps even calendar life and also the fact that when batteries provide enough range that even 20-30% degradation won't be nearly as much of an issue as it is on the much smaller batteries of today's gen non teslas.

zilog_jones

KCross wrote: »

I've seen some terrible phone batteries too but EV's don't seem to degrade at the same rate. I'm no battery expert but presumably the chemistries involved in the larger EV packs and better battery management systems have enabled them to survive longer.

I'm no expert either, but one big difference here is in a laptop you may only have around 3-6 cells, whereas you have like 192 cells in a 24 kWh Leaf. This means there is a lot more redundancy in an EV battery pack, and larger tolerances.

cnocbui

DrPhilG wrote: »

I have a 3 year old Leaf and according to the LeafSpy reports I'm at about 92% state of health. That's not the car's on screen display, it's taken from a bluetooth adaptor connected to the OBD port.

More importantly, I've been driving it myself for 2 of those 3 years and I'm still getting the same range now that I did when I started.

That certainly sounds a bit more promising.

BoatMad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Waste of time, BoatMad has some engineering qualification and automatically makes him an expert in Li batteries. BS, My Brother has an engineering masters and would not declare himself an expert in Li batteries or talk down to others like BoatMad.

Worked ten years in battery related designs in all chemistries , last five years in Li

28 years in embedded design. Hardware software
Defence , car and engine assembly robotics , automate. Guided vehicles , logistics tracking devices gsm etc.

Graduate and post graduate qualification in electronic engineering

Again you attack the person ,but you consistently avoid presenting any science to back up your arguments. You re-reguritate out of date " populism " largely promoted by certain sections of the media largely mis understanding Li tech

Cycle life plays a part , but the major factor in Li degradation. In calander life

BoatMad

KCross wrote: »

I think its largely understood that you cant compare a laptop battery to an EV battery.

I've seen some terrible phone batteries too but EV's don't seem to degrade at the same rate. I'm no battery expert but presumably the chemistries involved in the larger EV packs and better battery management systems have enabled them to survive longer.

Significant degradation after 3 years is just not happening in the EV world. There are two main ways to determine that.... range achieved from a charge and in the case of the Leaf the use of the LeafSpy app.

A survey of UK users is graphed here, see the graphs in the first post:
https://speakev.com/threads/the-batt...-thread.18923/


EDIT: Your own greencarreports link even agrees that significant degradation isn't happening particularly on the newer batteries (2013+)

Firstly mobile devices tend to be the highest power density chemistries

These typically have the shortest calander life and they are typically very price sensitive, hence cheaply made


In EVs this is not the case.

Mobile devices also are subjected to far greater discharges then EVs , that doesn't help either

BoatMad

BoatMad wrote: »

Worked ten years in battery related designs in all chemistries , last five years in Li

28 years in embedded design. Hardware software
Defence , car and engine assembly robotics , automate. Guided vehicles , logistics tracking devices gsm etc.

Graduate and post graduate qualification in electronic engineering

Again you attack the person ,but you consistently avoid presenting any science to back up your arguments. You re-reguritate out of date " populism " largely promoted by certain sections of the media largely mis understanding Li tech

Cycle life plays a part , but the major factor in Li degradation. In calander life

If you are a low mileage then yes, cycle life will be the greatest reason for capacity loss, if you're a high mileage driver then cycling will be the greatest contributing factor.

BoatMad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If you are a low mileage then yes, cycle life will be the greatest reason for capacity loss, if you're a high mileage driver then cycling will be the greatest contributing factor.

This is patently not true in the general case. In reality unless you are charging multiple times a day every day , the calendar life degradation is likely to still dominate.

This is why you have low calander life high mileage leafs without bar loss , but the opposite is the case with bar loss

Again this is because parasitic action is the greatest factor in degradation ( outside out of spec usage or charging patterns )

Don't forget that the original leaf battery was the most sensitive of all chemistry to heat. So someone who fast charged a lot suffered greater degradation, there are many other factors , calendar life is just one.

BoatMad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Don't forget that the original leaf battery was the most sensitive of all chemistry to heat. So someone who fast charged a lot suffered greater degradation, there are many other factors , calendar life is just one.

But that data was mainly from the US from very high ambients and was more.a design fault that took the battery out of spec ( as well as a Li-ion composition that was more sensitive to temperature excursions outside the spec )

Remain within spec and calander life remains the predominant factor in degradation

I will accept that certain chemistries trade power density for cycle life ( LiCo being the obvious ) but this is not typical of EV batteries

One of the common issues with Li has been design engineers unfamiliarity with the precise charging and discharging specifications and ensuring the systems remain within that spec. This was the issue behind early Li failures

goz83

I posted a video in a thread yesterday. This bit is relevant to the topic being discussed I think. Skip to 33:05 for the dendrite bit, but it's worth a couple of minutes to watch the segment. The future of EV batteries perhaps?

beepers

I am looking to buy a TESLA 3 (when available). To go with this I have been investigating the possibilities of solar / battery power. Day time use car (depleting car battery), and solar charging garage battery (weather dependent). Night time charge car from garage battery. Have found two options. 1. TESLA Powerwall and solar panels. 2. MOIXA solar panels and battery. I gather both these need to be grid connected.

Why would you go to the huge expense when you can charge for as little as 6.5 Cent per Kwh on night rate ?

Spend some money instead and upgrade your single phase supply instead and install a 7 Kw charge point.

By the time you start to make some money on this your battery might not provide the power you need.....

I would wait for the possibility of a feed-in-tariff and then the Grid will become your gigantic unlimited "free" battery!

Gumbo

The problem with waiting for a FIT, is that it will increase the price of these systems imo.

That's quite possible, it will also mean a lot of dodgy installers that will try to rip us off.

If there's ever a grant then that will encourage these installers to install more also.

antoinolachtnai

If there is a feed-in tariff (as opposed to being paid market price), and you have already installed your PV, don't expect to benefit from the FIT. The purpose of the FIT would be to encourage more people to install PV, not to pay people who have already had it installed.

unkel

antoinolachtnai wrote:

If there is a feed-in tariff (as opposed to being paid market price), and you have already installed your PV, don't expect to benefit from the FIT. The purpose of the FIT would be to encourage more people to install PV, not to pay people who have already had it installed.

I doubt they can establish if you already had pv or not?

antoinolachtnai

unkel wrote: »

I doubt they can establish if you already had pv or not?

Satellite photo is one way. Another is that they can look at the receipt for the equipment. if someone used advantage of the Home Renovation Incentive, got a grant from SEAI or got an EEOS payment from an energy supplier it will be pretty obvious. Also, they will know from the date on your certificate from the electrician.

ethernet

unkel wrote: »

I doubt they can establish if you already had pv or not?

Wouldn't it have been registered as per the regulations - at least if you're still on the grid?

I'd imagine if connected to the grid the ESB would be aware, as far as I'm aware you have to apply to connect to the grid, I doubt anyone can just connect at will to the grid.

unkel

I think that's all a bit paranoid. And it would be mean & counterproductive. FIT is not just to encourage new pv installs. Its also to take pressure of the grid, even to decrease the electricity the state has to produce

I'd say if we get fit, everyone will get it

antoinolachtnai

These are just the typical rules for a FIT.

The sole purpose of a FIT is to encourage new installs. Paying a FIT to existing installs is just a waste of money, a 'deadweight loss' as the economists call it. It won't do anything to take pressure off the grid. PV does not take pressure off the grid in general terms.

unkel

Can't agree. FIT for all would mean current pv owners might get rid of silly ridiculously inefficient yokes like immersion diverters (do anything rather than give free lecky to the grid, right?)

Or relax their regime running everything during the day, instead run at night and give valuable daytime lecky back to the grid for fit compensation

Double whammy everyone wins

antoinolachtnai

Summertime daytime lecky is worth damn-all. The SEM marginal cost today was 27 euros a MWh. Even if you add on the distribution and transmission, that's still only 77 euros a MWh.

The reason the price is so low appears to be imports on the interconnector of cheap PV from GB and Europe. There is a lot of it around. There is no real market for it.

It might actually be better use of money to subsidise people to use as much of this cheap green electricity during the day as possible, rather than incentivising them to generate even more of it.

unkel

Ha! That's another issue altogether. We're overrun now with renewables are we because our neighbours are years ahead of us? And we import their lecky cheaply? I read somewhere that Scotland is planning to have 100% renewable lecky by 2020. Seems very ambitious but surely if they can do it within a few years, it's also very doable for us within a few years more. We have far better solar potential

Extremely cheap fully renewable leccy will be with us all within a decade?

Fire up a few gas stations on very cold overcast days in winter is all the fossil we need going forward?

All our eggs are in one basket, at peak wind capacity we generate 65% of out total Peak electricity from wind energy, however on calm days could be 5% so there's a huge imbalance and this is where solar PV can greatly add to the renewable mix.

The max the grid can take is 65% and 70% in 2018.

antoinolachtnai

unkel wrote: »

Ha! That's another issue altogether. We're overrun now with renewables are we because our neighbours are years ahead of us? And we import their lecky cheaply? I read somewhere that Scotland is planning to have 100% renewable lecky by 2020. Seems very ambitious but surely if they can do it within a few years, it's also very doable for us within a few years more. We have far better solar potential

Extremely cheap fully renewable leccy will be with us all within a decade?

Fire up a few gas stations on very cold overcast days in winter is all the fossil we need going forward?

How do the Scottish plan to do that on calm nights?

It isn't cheap. The producers of power are being paid a much higher feed-in tariff for this electricity. They need this much higher feed-in tariff to justify the capital expenditure.

I am not saying it isn't good value by the way. I am just saying that you should not expect 'cheap' electricity. Electricity will have a 'low marginal cost' but that is not the same as 'cheap'.

As you point out, you need to pay not only for the capital costs of the PV and wind, but also for the equivalent volume of gas plants.

Unless you can manage demand somehow. That's really the key.