Tesla’s April 30 Announcement Confirmed To Be Home Battery And “Very Large” Utility-Scale Battery

APR 22 2015 BY ERIC LOVEDAY 80

New Major Non-Car Product To Debut In April From Tesla

New Major Non-Car Product To Debut In April From Tesla

Well, that much-anticipated April 30th announcement by Tesla Motors has been spoiled ahead of time by…Tesla Motors.

We basically all knew what would be announced on April 30th anyways, but in an email to investors, Tesla put an end to the anticipation.  The email includes this statement:

“We will introduce the Tesla home battery and a very large utility scale battery.”

Tesla’s Jeffrey Evanson, head of investor relations, stated this of the automaker’s home battery setup “[we] will explain the advantages of our solutions and why past battery options were not compelling.”

Bloomberg reached out to Tesla for comment.  Khobi Brooklyn, a Tesla spokeswoman, remarked “we’ll share more information next week.”

Tesla/Solar City Energy Storage Solution System Is In The "Pilot Program" Stage Today

Tesla/Solar City Energy Storage Solution System Is In The “Pilot Program” Stage Today

The April 30th announcement was first hinted at back in February by Elon Musk during the earnings conference call when he stated:

“We are going to unveil the Tesla home battery, the consumer battery that would be for use in people’s houses or businesses fairly soon.”

Source: Bloomberg

Categories: Tesla

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

80 Comments on "Tesla’s April 30 Announcement Confirmed To Be Home Battery And “Very Large” Utility-Scale Battery"

newest oldest most voted

Well if they can assure 95% of capacity after so many miles driven, batteries for solar & utility should provide new quality!

… and cheap price, too!

Would be interesting what they consider a “home battery.” The options I saw mentioned before were 5 and 10 kW {sorry if the kW is used wrong, but most know what I mean}. My home uses about 15 kWh daily in the summer and near 45 daily in the dead of winter.

Yes, during a power failure, you will have to do without for a bit. You will have to turn off your 80″ plasma TV, turn your electric heat down to 65°F, and don’t bake anything in your electric oven until the power comes back on.

Thank you Aaron, my LED TV is a 34″ model, yes my HVAC is all electric {SEER 19 / 10.2 HSPF} and as long as the 6,810 nameplate rated watt solar array keeps producing more than the wife and I use, that part is all good.

But IMHO, if all you are going to be able to operate is 1/3 or less of your typical usage, Generac makes a natural gas generator for those “emergencies.”

FYI:
kW is “power” as in energy capacity per time: kWh per h

kWh refers to “energy storage capacity” (total of Volts * Amps of energy)

BTW: Typical home energy storage is 5-15 kWh … with 8-12 kWh being more typical. Residential energy storage doesn’t need to meet a full days energy use; just enough to offset periods of peak use when rates are high due to high grid power demand. (or after solar dusk)

I think what its going to be useful for is rapid charging. It will be easier to do that with the battery than it would direct from the grid.

This announcement makes sense, given the recent attempts to curtail net metering in many States. Utilities needs to be careful what they ask for. If the Gigafactory can make home/business storage affordable, then net metering isn’t really important.

Now a utility has to ask whether it makes more sense to buy your excess electricity and sell it to your neighbor, which saves them the transmission losses and some infrastructure costs.

I’m guessing that although what you say is true for some states, it’s not for others, in particular northern states where there’s going to be a lot of seasonal variation in the amount of power produced by a PV array. Even a very large home battery couldn’t be expected to smooth out more than a couple days of low output – certainly not a whole winter of low output.

It’s still entirely practicable to net out to zero for the year with home PV in (say) Michigan, by overproducing in the summer to compensate for the winter. But I don’t see batteries alone providing the necessary seasonal bridge.

I’d love to be proven wrong, mind you.

Also, when you over produce in the summer, you can’t magically make your battery bigger to accommodate that energy for 3 or 4 months. But, if just sort of accept some of those losses and you size your PV and battery correctly (while using some fossil fuel or biomass for heating), winter in the northeast could be managed.

I’d love to be “off grid”, and if the Tesla battery could enable that economically, and help smooth daily demand to enable more PV and wind on the grid, then that’s a win win situation.

No. You’re right. All the industry-gaming on what’s going to happen basically comes down to whether to bet that batteries can be this “bridge”, to off-grid defection. Perhaps too many analysts bet they can’t, and are correct because of the PV-battery requirements. On the other hand, it won’t even take 1-2% defection to ripple the sector.

If you remain tied to a pole, confidence in sector survival goes up dramatically (as could your rates).

I think there are two surprises here. One is definitely the scale of use in the utility sector, to balance resources and arbitrage the bleeding edges of very short-term demand. The other could be finding out just how much better the economies are, in lower density (150-200wh/kg) cells. I wouldn’t be surprised if Tesla announces a few contracts.

I am closing following a number of other grid-scale battery companies, Ambri and others. Footprint and weight is not nearly as critical for utility sized products than cost and cycles. Some of these esoteric battery chemistries are far cheaper than Li, better life cycles (ie 20 YEARS of daily 100% discharge, etc.).

Yes, it continues to amaze me that everybody is seriously talking about using li-ion batteries for stationary power storage. Those were developed for portable consumer electronics, where high energy density, small size, and low weight are important. Those characteristics are important for EVs too, of course. But -none- of those characteristics are important for stationary storage.

Why isn’t industry developing flow batteries, or some other type of battery with good potential for large capacity energy storage, as the go-to stationary energy storage solution? It’s a mystery to me.

I suspect…

1) Most home batteries will be installed in garages, where the compact size of Li-Ion is a benefit.

2) Home batteries will need to be periodically moved/replaced/recycled, so the light weight of Li-Ion is again a benefit.

3) Focusing on Li-Ion will provide an economy of scale that makes them cheaper than (what will be viewed as) non-standard alternatives.

4) Li-Ion cells can discharge extremely fast, allowing them to power Tesla’s next product … in-home Tesla Super-Chargers.

Guess we’ll see.

Guess we will see.

There’s no mystery. It’s all about cost.

The most lucrative market for batteries is to take over spinning reserve. There, the critical metric is cost per kW, not per kWh. You only need spinning reserve to provide energy for 20-30 minutes, by which time operating reserve gets online. A 1MW unit would only need ~500kWh of 2C batteries, so even at $400/kWh that’s only $200k (plus the cost of power electronics). 1MW of traditional spinning reserve would cost $0.5-1M.

Flow batteries are expensive per kW. They’re usually 1/4C, and sometimes 1/2C, but never more than that due to cell stack cost, so they’re targeting multi-hour storage. But 4-hour storage needs to get down to <$200/kWh before it starts competing with <$1000/kW natural gas peakers. Vanadium flow batteries have little hope of ever doing so (due to vanadium cost and physics), but EOS energy is claiming they can hit $160/kWh with their zinc-air system.

Tesla will likely hit similar pricing also. They make inverters and VFDs for pennies per watt to drive their motors, and paired with cheap batteries, they should be able to get well under <$1000/W for utility scale storage.

Mass off-grid defection is really only a threat in Australia, due to the extremely expensive transmission and distribution (T&D alone costs $0.15-0.20/kWh).

Elsewhere, the percent of people going off-grid (instead of just net metered) will be much less than 1%.

Surely it would be more affordable to simply install sufficient solar power capacity to provide adequate power on winter days, perhaps even cloudy winter days, rather than try to store enough power to last an entire season! The price of batteries is going to continue to come down over the next several years or decades, but it’s not going to come down -that- far. And even if it did, where the heck would you put such a massive bank of batteries? I think that would take more room than the entire house!

Sooner or later, we need to stop thinking of solar power panels as something that you only put on the roof of your house, and start thinking about installing sufficient area of panels to actually provide for -most- of the power we need. Assuming, that is, that the general public doesn’t suddenly come to its senses and realize that nuclear power is by far the best option available with current technology. That seems to be a safe assumption.

“Nuclear power is the best option…” can we bury the nuclear waste in your summer home’s backyard? And then you can have a glow in the dark family.

All the existing used nuclear fuel from today’s US reactors would cover the area of a football field a couple of meters high. It is not that much. Further, if we wanted to just throw it away, we could put it down boreholes far beneath any aquifer. Or we could put it into geologically stable salt formations, where it would remain encased for millions of years. Even for today’s reactors, nuclear waste is a political problem, not a technical one. Future reactors will generate even less waste.

Current nuclear power does have the waste problem, but there is a solution. Liquid Flouride Thorium Reactors, LFTR, invented in the 1960s and proven viable have many advantages. Uses almost all the available energy 99.9% vs conventional 0.7%. This translates to almost no waste to dispose, and the type of waste is different so only needs to be stored 300 years instead of 10,000. Liquid means is cannot have a melt-down as it is already in liquid state. Low cost as thorium does not have to be enriched like uranium. See flibe-energy.com

Why is the home batterie Tesla branded instead of SolarCity?

Don’t tell me it’s because you can charge your Model S/X at the supercharger, drive it home and transfere some of the power to your home battery. Free power for your car AND you home would be great, but I can’t see this beeing a viable business (especially with maybe 10kWh storage and up to 150 miles to the next supercharger). But who knows…

I was hoping the other way. That the home battery would build up a nice buffer, then you could Supercharge your Tesla at home (if desired). This would be for times that you roll in on low energy and have to leave soon.

Ah, yeah – good thinking! That 10kWh could be a charge-boost of like 30 miles in maybe 5 minutes. A nice effect besides the solar energy / night price power storage.

I think it is because Tesla is the ones with the battery building expertise.

Because people know what the Tesla brand is. Very few people outside of the west coast have ever heard of SolarCity.

Probably because Tesla can borrow for less than SC.

Guess it’s the Tesla equivalent of Porsche sunglasses. The brand name adds extra value to unrelated products.

I wonder if Elon has a plan for Tesla to someday acquire or merge with Solar City, rather than keeping them as two separate entities.

Quite simple. Tesla needs the boost in stock price more than Solarcity, so it can sell few million shares quickly to its fanboys.

Anti-Tesla troll See Through strikes again!

If the troll would bother following what Musk has been saying all along he would know that renewable energy and the electrification of transportation are inextricably linked together as the two main goals of Musk’s endeavors.

As such, backup battery storage is very important because it counters the utilities never ending attempts to slow and eventually stop homeowner solar pv by manipulating the rate structures to make it uneconomical.

Yes, it is starting to be an amusement to read his comments. Very much like enjoying the nasty Nelly Olson comments in “The little house on the prairie”.

Cavaron asked:

“Why is the home batterie Tesla branded instead of SolarCity?”

Presumably because Elon Musk is looking ahead to Tesla’s Gigafactory manufacturing battery cells and battery packs for home energy storage. That plan has already been announced. And altho Musk doesn’t own SolarCity, he is on the board of directors.

you dont need solar city for tesla batteries. you can install tesla batteries in your garage and charge them up during low charge times “11pm to 6 am” and use it during the peak hours. so you can use your washer anytime your want and charge your car anytime you want.

This might indicate that Tesla has a lot of batteries that they want to get rid of; and that there is a new battery with higher energy density that will be used with cars. It is a very clever way to get rid of these lower energy density batteries since they will be used for stationary applications!

I am hoping for at least 15% increase in range for the model S.

A home battery doesn’t need to be tied to solar to be viable.
It can also be used shift the load from day to night – so charge at night on low rate and drain during the day when the rates are much higher.
Not much use if you are on flat rate power though 🙂

I wonder what the payback period would be if you set one of these up in your basement and just let it do that all year long. Buy low and sell high.

Buy low sell high will probably only work in a few markets, financially. It is also highest cycle count on the battery.

The real money right now is frequency regulation, but it requires a tight tie in with the utility. The other big financial winner is peak shaving to reduce demand charges, but that is not a residential issue.

Not sure if Tesla will have cracked the nut on those, both from regulation and software. But it would fit into Tesla’s MO to offer the product now, then upgrade it to do those features in the future.

Ok, I read my response and it was a crappy answer to your question, so I’ll try again.

Let’s imagine the battery system costs $10k. If electricity was completely free at night, and the battery had the capacity to power your home the entire day, your electricity bill would go to zero. This is close to the best case scenario. There is actually a plan from TXU in Texas that offers “free nights”.

I will use $100 / mo as an easy math average electricity bill. That would mean 100 months (8.3 years) for the battery to “break even”. Plug in your own numbers for average electricity bill and cost of the system.

If you fully discharge the battery pack every day for 8.3 years that is approximately 3030 cycles (8.3 years x 365 days).

That is the crux of the problem. If it takes 8.3 years to pay for itself, and only has a 10 year useful life, it isn’t very valuable.

I expect Tesla to add some sort of intangible value, otherwise it won’t really sell well. kdawg’s suggestion of home quick charging would be an example.

I can think of a few additional tangible values:

1) It provides emergency backup power. Backup generators are loud and expensive and a maintenance pain.

2) It provides a place to store the energy from your Solar City panels, useful to those who cannot sell back to the power company.

3) It will also power your future in-home Tesla Super-Charger.

Less tangible…

4) All of the above will compete with today’s grid as well as compete with gasoline fuel. That could potentially lower the price of both.

Josh, the problem is that the arbitrage opportunity would not last very long. As soon as people understand they can earn money by storing low priced electricity at night, everyone will be doing it, and the demand for electricity goes up at night, and goes down during the day. The demand and price difference eventually disappears. Good for the grid, but not for those who are just trying to game the system.

I am not trying to ignore that problem. I was just trying to put some numbers behind the current value proposition.

Buying anything with an 8 – 10 year payback period is a dicey proposition. The world changes a lot over that time.

Rick – beyond Solar – Wind is often more productive at night – at least here in Ontario, such that we have Excess Wind Energy produced, more often than Excess Solar Energy Produced!

For the Time Offset/Solar Peak Delayed Use Details – we will have to wait until the actual announcement to understand the plans for it – which for sure will have some microprocessor/clock interface for power management, and might even be networked for over the air updates to software, like the Model S – which of course – Tesla has excellent Experience with!

Even worse, it may not be economic compared to other solutions.

The 10kwh flooded cell lead acid battery in my off-grid summer home costs less than $1.5k, and so far has lasted about 12 years. It’s hard to complete with stationary lead acid batteries.

That picture shows what appears to be a standard Schneider PV inverter beside the Tesla box, so I can only assume the Tesla box is just a battery, perhaps with an integral BMS/charger of some sort.

It will be easier to debate the value after they announce all the details.

I really fell like there needs to be some other benefit that makes homeowners want it. I am guessing it will be related to the charge/discharge rate of the pack, which is a limiting factor with lead acid.

“The 10kwh flooded cell lead acid battery in my off-grid summer home costs less than $1.5k, and so far has lasted about 12 years. It’s hard to complete with stationary lead acid batteries.”

Actually it’s no longer hard for lithium-ion batteries to compete. Li-ion batteries last about three times as long as deep-cycle lead-acid batteries, when used for home energy storage. Now that the price of li-ion batteries has come down, more and more companies are offering those for home energy storage. Over time, li-ion is now cheaper. Higher purchase cost, but they last a lot longer before needing replacement.

QCO, $150/kwh isn’t much lower than li ion, and the cycle characteristics of lithium are recognized as better than lead-acid.

EOS energy offers zinc-air batteries for $160/kWh … about the same as your lead-acid batteries. They claim 10,000 cycles which is 27 years if cycled daily. Also consider that zinc-air cells have no toxic electrolyte, no toxic heavy metals, no hydrogen gassing when charging, and about 1/3 the weight and size.

It’s an interesting proposition, kdawg. In an attempt to add a figure to Josh’s payback periods, I can report having seen 65% discharge rates used by those modeling home storage. So, you have to gross up the storage need, from the kwh you expect to yield. If all you are looking to do is day/night arbitrage, figures like 80-90% aren’t wise, for cell life.

If it was cost-effective to buy grid power during off-peak hours, store the power in battery packs, and use it during the day, then industry would already be doing that. They have a strong incentive to time-shift power demand, to avoid industrial power surcharges from the local utility.

The fact that they don’t, pretty well shows that batteries are much too expensive for that sort of thing. Maybe someday the per-kWh price will come down that far, but don’t expect it to happen soon. Certainly not within the next few years.

BTW — The American single-family home average electrical energy use is 30 kWh per day. Somewhat less in Europe, where the average house size is smaller and there’s a lot less use of central A/C. So think about that when you’re considering how big a battery pack you’d need to do a significant amount of time-shifting.

Lensman said: “If it was cost-effective to buy grid power during off-peak hours, store the power in battery packs, and use it during the day, then industry would already be doing that.”

They are starting to do that:

http://www.solarcity.com/newsroom/press/solarcity-introduces-energy-storage-businesses

http://www.triplepundit.com/2014/02/7-eleven-avis-walgreens-reduce-peak-power-demand-realize-big-energy-savings/

http://ir.idealpower.com/press-releases/detail/254

CDAVIS:

There are two very different uses of the word “peak” here. Please don’t confuse them.

The first two links you gave were for systems that smooth out power demand on a minute-by-minute basis, eliminating peaks (or spikes) in demand. The third link gives a description too vague to tell what their system does.

Contrariwise, a utility’s “peak demand period” lasts for hours every workday.

Smoothing out peaks in demand requires only a few minutes’ worth of energy storage. Time-shifting of drawing electricity from the grid to the time of day when utilities sell electricity at “off-peak” prices would require many -hours- worth of storage.

Lensman Said: “BTW — The American single-family home average electrical energy use is 30 kWh per day.”, which – might be an old Statistic, as according to the Bill right in front of me for Electricity – in October 2012 – my daily average was about 23 kWh, and for the last 3 bills (a 6 month time frame, as we are billed every two months), I have used an average of about 11 – 11.5 kWh Per Day! Changes we have done – First – since 2005 – We had all lighting with Compact Fluorescent Bulbs, but have of late (Last 2 years or so) gradually switched to LED Lighting, we also have changed from CRT Monitors for our Computers – to LED Monitors, and the TV Changed from an LCD – to an LED Monitor! One other thing – a Change from always on PC’s to using ‘Hibernate Mode’ and shutting down that way – to keep all operations available on start up! For Most Homes – the Switch from Incandescent to Compact Fluorescent Lights is enough to power up an average Commuter Electric Vehicle; if combined with some simple Energy Efficiency tips with the home PC’s –… Read more »

This so much more better “quality” news on behalf of Tesla than there recent (embarrasing) piece of information regarding 0.2 sec gain in the 0-60mph. This is a trend that could pontentially change a whole industry, can have a huge impact on global warming (as an incentive to shift electricity production to PV). To me this brings Tesla back where they should never have left, a disruptive company (as opposed to becoming a gadget maker (falcon doors issues etc…).

If only someone could write a song and make a music video about this “quality” Tesla news. 😉

Re: timing of the announcement, there is an article out today about how California has a credit/incentive program for battery storage similar to the ZEV credit program for cars, and a review of the program reveals Tesla accounts for the majority of payouts. This income would therefor presumably show up on the Q1 financials, so they would have to explain it then anyhow, so might as well introduce it more fully ahead of time. Just a guess on my part. We’ll find out for sure on May 6.

I suspect that this will be marketed as both demand shifting and a household UPS. Right now, a lot of people in areas that get severe winter weather have gasoline or NG whole-house generators. These things are expensive and get very little usage, typically only a few runs of several hours per year. A house-sized UPS that helps reduce your electricity bill year-round AND can keep your lights on for 12 to 24 hours (in limp-along mode) when a tree branch or car takes out a power line miles away would be very interesting to a lot of people.

I could see people installing PV and going off grid with a Tesla battery backup and a NG whole-house generator, if their utility doesn’t offer net metering and their climate that doesn’t have harsh winters (southern).

New proposal in CA – use less electricity and pay more.

http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/New-California-proposal-Use-less-electricity-6215308.php

Those of us with solar will penalized. You knew it was gonna happen with all the solar installs happening out here.

Isn’t this type of residential setup a electric utility’s nightmare? Combined with a PV setup (but not required), a person could run totally off the grid. And even if they couldn’t, they could ‘abuse’ TOU plans and store electricity during off peak hours at a fraction of the price of peak hours.

Tapping the grid overnight would still incur transmission charges from the utility, but people with a large enough PV setup could theoretically lived completely off the grid.

If enough people were to abuse TOU rates, and store energy from cheap periods to use during the peak time, then the utility will adjust the TOU as the demand for peak power decreases and the demand for off-peak increases. So instead of a 25c/kWh gap, it might be 20c or 15c, increasing the time it takes to takes people to make their money back and reducing the rate of further installations. The energy company let market forces solve their demand peak/valley issue.

While I think you’re right directionally, we could take New England as an example and prove the mountain of arbitrage that would be needed. Roughly 22GW peak and 12GW over-night swings would require more than 10,000,000 KWh of storage (after losses and discharge maximums). This, to “arb” just one hour of the cycle. We’ll probably keep TOU, and the early adopter will get paid.

I don’t see it being very long before demand-response pays much more per kwh, to residents, when they can either/both turn off HTML connected appliances, or time their battery’s feeding kwh back to the grid on peak days of the year. Rate design will make those prices higher, as many state utility commissions will address this in the coming years.

A kilowatt of new grid capacity comes no cheaper than about $1,000, to build. The party evaluating that, and places like Texas allowing up to $9 kwh on their wholesale market, will be among the first bidders for storage.

If you look at off-grid living websites, it rather quickly becomes obvious that the average solar power installation is hopelessly inadequate for most people’s actual energy demands. Other than info about how to install a solar power system and what type to buy, most of the info on those sites is about how to live with less power. A -lot- less. If you want to go off-grid and you don’t want to live like the proverbial starving artist, then think seriously about installing PV panels on elevated frames in your back yard and side yards. Not just the roof. Furthermore, consider what you’ll do for power on a cloudy day. On a heavily overcast day, the energy from PV drops to only about 10% of what it is on a sunny day. The worst-case scenario is 5%! For me at least, that would be a deal-killer. No way is it affordable to install 10x as many solar panels as I’d need on a sunny day, let alone 20x. Unless you live where it’s almost never overcast, then you most likely won’t be able to get away with disconnecting from the grid. You’ll need it for those days when it’s raining,… Read more »

Lensman your “As I posted above, the average American home uses an average of 30 kWh per day. That average will be less in areas where the climate is mild and you don’t need central A/C.” – I replied to above in detail – but I used to use 23 kWh a day 2 years back, and simple changes have moved that down to 11 kWh a day now in just 2 years! I have Central Air, Natural Gas Heat, and 100 Amp Service Panel. Ice Storms in Toronto – are not exactly ‘Warmer Climates’ either! Toronto Has had colder Weather this winter than Anchorage, Alaska!

I live in an Apartment on 2nd & 3rd Floors but pay my own utilities! Gas has gone up more than Electricity, but we are told – that May 1st will get some increases on our Electric Rates!

Lensman said “If you drive 14,000 miles per year, as an average American does, you’ll need about 14 kWh per day to charge it, assuming 15% charging losses.” – So let’s see – a LEAF (The Most Popular EV) gets about 4 mile per kWh at the car; a Tesla about 3 Miles per kWh; and maybe the Spark (The Most Efficient EV) might get 5 miles per kWh: So I figure – an average of 4 is fair! Using your 14,000 miles a year, 4 miles per kWh nets out to 3500 kWh, and averaging over 250 Days = 14 kWh per day. Taking the 3500 kWh, and multiplying by 1.15 (= +15% extra – for Losses he proposes) means that 4025 kWh are used, and that over just 200 days = 20.125 kWh a day. (Over those same 250 days = just 16.1 kWh a day!) So – Reasonable Figuring that 14 kWh per day – would be added for driving the car. However – this is assuming that one would do 100% of that charging/Energy Consumption at the Home Charger/NEMA 14-50 Plug, etc! I suspect some miles charging might not be just added at home, and would… Read more »

A battery back up system would be great for most power outages that last a few hours to a day. I would sure cut down on the huge amount of noise that I hear when everyone fires up their Dino juice generators.

I still think there is going to be massive upheaval in the coal industry if this system is around $3000 to $5000 dollars for a 15 kilowatt system. Such as there are already hundreds of thousands of people who have solar panels that are already paid off so this would be a great feature to add to them.

“…why past battery options were not compelling.”

Well, that’s pretty simple. To paraphrase Ross Perot: “It’s the price, stupid.”

As the kWh price of batteries comes down, more people will install battery storage units in their homes and businesses, to complement solar power, and eventually — if and when batteries become cheap enough — to time-shift drawing power from the grid to off-peak hours.

Tesla has jumped the fence so to speak as it has been revealed they have a pilot project in 11 Walmart stores, along with other corporate clients already up and running.
Also it is projected that 50% of current solar city users will adopt Tesla’s storage system.
Combined with Deutsche Banks’s upgrade this hat trick of good news bumped the stock up %5 today.

50% of Solar City customers – in what states? The battery helps those in California primarily. However, what about those in New Jersey or New York who cannot take advantage of Time of Use load shaving? The battery is simply a backup power standby battery at that point.

It is irresponsible of the one analyst estimating 50% of Solar City existing customers are going to go for a standby battery nationally. However, over the course of a couple years, perhaps Californians will opt for the box if they find the price low enough to allow some return on investment. (oh yeah, don’t forget that California allows for rebates which is why the price will be good there).

They should make the battery portable, to be used in devices. Say like lawnmowers, snowblowers, NEVs, etc. I know these products exist now, but I could imagine much better/more powerful devices.

+1 for a battery powered 2-stage snowblower

Greenworks is rolling out an 80V system right now. The 56V eGo system got a bunch of good reviews last year. There’s a bunch of 40V systems out there. Snow Joe has cordless electric snowblowers.

These electric lawn tools seem to be sold as oversized power tools. Hence they’re sold at Lowe’s and Home Depot. I guess I can’t imagine that Tesla has access to such superior tech that they would enter such a crowded market.

Tesla does not want to go to war with electric utility providers and electric utility providers will in the end not be able to stop the Home Battery revolution.

Perhaps Tesla will announce that they have already partnered up with a few forward thinking electric utilities for those utilities to be the local distributor/installer of the Tesla Home Battery and that Tesla will also be providing those utilities very large Zone Grid Batteries.

It is in the utilities best interest to themselves be the early promoters of Home Battery UPS & peek-load-balancing as a monthly billable service.

CherylG's_DirtyLittleSecret

Cue the power companies….
We will charge all solar and energy storage users umpteen thousand a year for connectivity to the grid.
We will tax all solar and energy storage users umpteen thousand a year because they are now “Power Suppliers” and not consumers.

etc……

+1
‘It is not in our best interest to have you compete with us, so we will use any legal means we have to slow you down.’

This and the fact it is not practical to defect from the grid, means hard times ahead for SolarCity, Tesla.

Grid players do welcome manageable battery standby. They want high demand customers to smooth out their peak demand needs, even curtail peak demand power use. This is one way for a Walmart to “slow down” their afternoon power needs and make power dips, brown outs and importing expensive standby power obsolete.

I agree. Suggesting that your local electric utility will become a dealer/installer for Tesla home energy storage is like suggesting GM and Nissan dealers will start selling Tesla cars. Certainly Tesla hopes to sell battery packs -to- electric utilities, for peak shaving if nothing else. But the electric utilities aren’t going to sell a system to customers which reduces the utility’s income!

These battery units will do wonders for load-shifting peak afternoon/early evening electric loads to night time. They don’t have to be connected to PV. They can recharge off the grid at night or morning.

Here in Redding, CA, the local municipal utility already has a huge program for load-shifting peak summer afternoon air conditioning load by installing things called “Ice Bears” that make ice at night, then melt the ice during the peak cooling hours to replace the compressor (and its electrical load) the next day. They are rated at about 35 ton-hours, if I remember correctly.

We probably have 200 Ice Bears installed around town. Our utility loves them – it’s cheaper than new generation/distribution capacity – and eligible building owners get new AC units installed for free.