Looking forward to concrete information...
I generally see about 10% loss due to charging. While that is a hit, the combination of allowing hookups to single phase 240 rather than both costly and permit intensive three phase along with the ability to not get charged high use fees by back feeding the grid during charged/non use times would outweigh the loss. You also would only see that extra loss on a percentage of a charge. Take a single car charge of 100 KWH in full sun, the grid would supply 50KWH, the solar would supply 17KWH, and the batteries another 23KWH. The station would be fully recharged in another 20 min, and have "lost" about 2KWH due to battery charging inefficiency. In dark it would be 50/50 with a station recharge time of just over an hour and an inefficiency loss of about 5KWH.
Oh and I'll toss station material costs into the mix, solar - 30K, one super charger - 10K, 300KW battery pack - 100K, plus the "station" call that 10K, total station cost 150k. Then I would say that it can do 16 30 min charges durring the daytime and 16 at night.
Full Charge of 85K pack in 1 Hour---according to Tesla Rep....anybody else have that confirmation?
That's pretty good----wonder how many chargers will be at each station?
And---can you "reserve" a charger via Touch Screen---when you are lets say up to 1 hour away?
As to where the power comes from---yea it would be nice to have it come from renewable sources---but I wouldn't be sad if it was hooked right into a nuke or natural gas power plant 20 feet away.
Main thing for me in all this is to get off the gasoline/diesel heroin habit.
Full Charge of 85K pack in 1 Hour---according to Tesla Rep... anybody else have that confirmation?
As far as I know: WRONG. Half charge in half hour is not the same as full charge in one hour.
I don't think you can get a full range charge in an hour because the charge rate slows down at the end. On the other hand, I don't think many folks will have the stomach to run it right down to zero either, so a full range charge isn't normally going to be required--particularly if the distance between superchargers is the three hours Elon has indicated.
I'm pretty sure the rep is going by the website where it talks about 300 mph charging.
I'm pretty sure the rep is going by the website where it talks about 300 mph charging. (jerry3)
Yes it does. But don't skip the fine print. There it says: "A Supercharger can charge about half the battery in 30 minutes." Why wouldn't it state that it can recharge an empty battery in 60 minutes? That would be simpler and at least as spectacular a statement. The accurate wording should ring a bell. (And besides, as you note, we all know that charging is slower and more stressful on the battery the closer to full the charge level is already. To be entirely precise, the website should state: "... the first half ...".)http://www.teslamotors.com/models/charging#/onthego
Right. I also suspect that 30 minutes of supercharging doesn't degrade the battery nearly as much as 60 minutes of supercharging would. My gut feeling is that that 60 minutes is 3x or 4x what 30 minutes is.
If you are putting batteries in these chargers just skip the whole charging the car bit for 30 minutes and give me a battery swap/rental system, then you only need 2 or 3 batteries rather than 10. Why the heck would I want to wait 30 minutes on the side of the road when there is a perfectly good battery charged inside the machine.
I agree with Brian on many points here. It is very inefficient to charge a battery from a battery. As long as Tesla is guaranteeing the battery I'll take it (swap.rent). Even in Saint Louis the solar panels will end up with snow on top of them for days unless you are paying someone to go out and scrap it off.... or are we now going to waist energy with heaters to melt it off.
Solar grid tied is all that is needed and a good idea. If you can get 240 or 208 volts there you can get 480 volts. Don't waste the time with added batteries. Tesla has already said they are 480 volt anyway. So solar panels pumping onto the grid. Charging from the grid.
swap/rent.... means I go by a Tesla service place and rent an 85kw battery and swap it along the way while traveling. When I return home I pick up my battery.
If you are putting batteries in these chargers just skip the whole charging the car bit for 30 minutes and give me a battery swap/rental system, then you only need 2 or 3 batteries rather than 10. Why the heck would I want to wait 30 minutes on the side of the road when there is a perfectly good battery charged inside the machine. (Sudre_)
This seems so obvious... yet it isn't. Firstly, the usual arguments against battery swapping apply: To make battery swapping work, the batteries must be owned by the provider and leased to the consumer. For whichever reasons, Tesla decided to sell the batteries. Also, battery swapping implies a commitment to a certain form factor and certain internal (electrical and electronic) specifications. This brings up a whole world of compatibility issues (think Microsoft Windows) that hinder development and deployment of new battery tech -- something we all have very strong hopes for. In the supercharger scenario, the charger provides the compatibility layer for whatever battery tech is inside, and that's it.
Secondly, batteries suitable for stationary use may not be suitable for use in cars. In particular, they may be cheaper for a variety of reasons (cheaper battery tech, used/worn batteries, lighter packaging to bring down cost for conditioning, you name it...), all of which boil down to a significantly lower energy density. Too low to store 85 kWh inside the floor of your car.
Another thought that may sound a little unconventional, particularly for the tree huggers among us... ;-) The solar panels and/or wind turbines of those supercharger installations will likely produce excess electricity for some time to come -- there just aren't enough Model Ss on the road to start queuing in front of those chargers, and even when there are more most of them will be charged in their home garage most of the time. With this said, it really doesn't matter if we lose a few percent charging battery-to-battery, or waste a few extra kWh on heating the panel to melt off snow and ice. The only thing that counts is that "it just works" and that they generate enough electricity to cover this "maintenance energy" plus the occasional supercharging customer. Don't be so greedy!
A few questions about you swap proposal?
Have you now created the need for an indoor enclosure, perhaps a sink and bathroom for the person working there, and some more machinery that wasn't already required?
Is this swap station going to be staffed 24/7/365 or can I only swap batteries from 9-5?
The person working there ( I take it I am not swapping them myself) is he trained? Qualified? How well is he paid? $7*24*365 = 61k yr...
When you say very inefficient, how much is very? Do you disagree with my 10% value?
I'm not sure that you realize how hard it can be to get three phase in some areas of the US. I am not allowed to have it run to my house where I live. Adding a three phase feed requirement is not a minor jump from single 240.
The key to the batteries and the solar is to allow fast charging, low grid load, and stay away from those terrible high use fees making the station cost very little to install and support.
My solar panels do a fine job of shedding feet of snow at my house, the angle on them seems to do the trick on its own. They are mostly black, they get hot on their own, no need for special heaters.
Swapping is a great idea, but it's going to be many years until the demand is anywhere near high enough to support the infrastructure to make is a reality.
Well, if they only built out enough to support the Model S cars currently on the road they'd have a serious problem in not too long a time. And perhaps they can sell the energy back to the electric utility. Even if they are solar/wind powered, they are still going to want to hook up to the grid in case they do have more cars charging than they have off-grid capacity.
No to to proof read this so I'll let Brain get the errors... gotta run.
Peter7, be reasonable.
The system can be automated??? I have no clue or care. There is a company called Better Place in other countries. Go look them up.
Gas stations work pretty good now with someone sitting at the counter all day and electricity is cheaper than gas.
The person working at a car wash that dries your car. How well is he trained? The guy at Jiffy Lube how well is he trained? Swapping a battery isn't rocket science. Tesla designed the pack to be easy and quick to swap..... altho Elon might be a rocket scientist so maybe it is a little tougher.
6%-10% loss to charge the batteries inside the machine. 6%-10% loss to charge the car. total 12-20% loss. That's not good in my opinion. Even if it is only 5% each for your total 10% that it twice as bad as just swapping the battery.
Getting three phase anywhere is EASY! I am an electrician. If you are putting poles out to get any voltage to location you can just put in larger wires or one more wire (single phase is 2 wires). You are not bringing 480 volts to a remote location (voltage drop every 100 feet). You are bringing a minimum of 4160 volt single phase to the location. A transformer will step it down to 480 volt three phase.
You forget that Brian H is right about solar. If you live South it is great and your system might work most of the time. If you live North you have 5 hours a day to charge with. Look up the charts on a solar sight. That 5 hours is an average over sun up to sun down and cloudy days throughout the year.
Most of the time they will shed that snow. I've had ice and snow sit on my 12/12 pitch roof for a week straight. Ice is the bigger problem. I guess no one will charge for those days.
It is going to be years before demand is enough for Tesla to really need superchargers anyway much less the expensive ones purposed. $80,000 to $100,000 in batteries to build one. Or use cheaper lead acid and replace them every 5 years?
oh and Volker.Berlin,
I totally agree with you. Just leave the whole batteries at the supercharger thing out of the equation.... swapping or not.
@Timo: Your numbers are correct, a 5kW system will produce around 20kWh per day on average (in Sydney).
The numbers I was disputing are these;
" Docrob | September 19, 2012
Comparing the image released to the car pictured under it the roof is about 12-13 metres long, assuming it is 2 car widths wide makes about 4 metres wide giving a total area of 50 square metres. Around the US solar insolation varies but on average solar output is about 5kwh/sq. metre/day, so a solar array on the supercharger pictured in Tesla marketing could produce 250 kwh/day, In California and Nevada this would be closer to 350 kwh per day."
I've yet to see solar panels that can *deliver* 1kW/m2 or 5kwH/m2/day. In order to do that and average of 4 hours usable sunlight throughout the year the panels need to be close to 100% efficient.
If I could generate 250kWh per day from my 50m2 garage roof I'd be doing it. That'd power 6 houses easily.
Swapping is also a "heavy lift" operation. It almost certainly requires robotic handling of the battery; not a job for Joe Lugnut standing under a car lift!
So it's very capital intensive. Inventory management of the batteries is also no joke; how many do you have to keep on hand fully charged at all times to accommodate spikes in demand?
But the biggest issue may be that it requires a whole different ownership setup. The company must own the batteries, and lease them. That's a huge change. I guess Renault & Better Place have a system worked out. Time will tell if that's successful.
In the US, it would require a huge number of swap stations, tho'.
So your the kind of guy who likes to toss out a stupid idea and walk out of the room without listening or thinking about any feedback hmm?
If not, comments like " I have no clue or care" sure make it seem that way.
Once again, you are not paying attention to the real costs associated with installs or on going operational costs. How much do you need to train someone or how much you need to pay someone to pull a 85KWH battery out of your S and put one back in is very real. I think that you are reasonably looking at paying out 100k a year minimum to someone for this, and keeping it up at the hours people would want will probably cost twice that. That seems like an awful lot of cost for something that you yourself are saying is going to be years before there is solid demand for them.
If you are electrician, then you should know what the penalty fees look like for exceeding power draw limits. Do you not think those should be factored into this? How much extra is it to permit 3 phase? Why can't I get 3 phase into my house when I ask if it's so easy?
The second battery loss you are talking about is always going to be there, so we are talking about a extra loss of 5-10%.
Yes, solar only produces when the sun is up. I would only expect it to generate about 100KWH a day (with the same 5 hours you mention that I always use for my calculations), but, generally again, this will be enough to stay away from those excess fees and reduce the install costs to the point that it makes it an easy decision to put it in.
I've never seen or heard of a transformer that will take single phase 4kV in and output three phase 480V. Could you point me at one?
Oh, and about Better Place, yes I've already been following them for a long time, thanks. There is a very good reason they chose where they are to install the system. Installing the same in the US at this point is silly. Just about everything is possible, that doesn't make it a good idea.
After reading all the comments, I will back off my "off-grid" prediction for the Superchargers. I agree there is not enough solar in all areas to guarantee capacity is waiting for you. We have already seen the teaser photo, so we know there is no wind turbine incorporated. It is nearly impossible to find a place that does not have wind or solar, but lets not get off topic. Elon is not a proponent of wind, so it just won't happen.
I still do not think the Supercharger will pull 90 kW off the grid to charge a car. I think it will use internal power conversion to deliver 90 kW per vehicle from an internal storage. It may have a 40A - 100A 240V connection to restore capacity to the Supercharger along with the solar array. This would avoid the need to have a 140+ amp 480V grid connection.
SInce you are an electrician, can you comment if 140+ amp 480V is a normally available electrical service at a gas station or small shopping plaza (think highway exit). 480V isn't hard, but having 140+ EXTRA amps available at any time is the difficulty. Or other QC service providers are justing giving me a run around?
Most all medium/large commercial has a minimum of 480 volt 200 amp service.
I would imagine that most small gas stations have a 240 typical service or a 208 three phase. There is a good chance that places like Quick Trips would have a 480/277 and 208/120 volt panels.
Shopping strip stores a lot of times have both. Anything in the last 10 years would be at least a 200 amp panel. Older place might only have a 100 amp panel.
It really depends on the builder/arch/EE and what they spent at the beginning.
I am not going into any more details about batteries at Superchargers, swapping or not, because I think both are a bad idea because of maintenance on the batteries and wasted efficiency. That's why I don't care. My original point was IF you put batteries at the chargers. That's most likely not going to happen. You have blown it up in to how the system would work. I don't care both are a bad idea... one is just a really bad idea.
There are no fees for exceeding your power draw limit on a commercial property -IF- you calculate it correctly and get the correct contract to start with. Please take note of the IF because you must have missed it in other comments. I have a 200 amp 240 volt service. If I draw 240 volts and 180 amps all day long I do not get an extra fee tacked on. From what I understand about de-regulated states (that are getting costs rammed up their a..) if the superchargers feed solar power back on the grid it spins the meter backwards. If the charging car pulls it off the grid it runs the meter forwards... that's simple. SO if the solar panels put 100kWh of power out for 5 hours that's 500kW for that day. If 10 cars charge half their battery that day they use 425kW of power. Tesla receives a payment (rams it up the utilities a..:-) from the electrical company for 75kW, $ at whatever the contract says... not a bill for over usage. Why waste money on batteries. One charger, one 480 volt 200 amp panel, $25-100 permit the price changes from place to place. (that's just for the service)
I will let Brian H discuss any solar panel issues because I actual like the idea of solar but it's not cost effective in MO.... unless Liz's deal works out with all the credits. In MO we pay 5 to 7 cents per kWh... very cheap. Brian H does have some very good points about it tho... altho with prices dropping like they are I am getting temped to buy some. We are regulated tho so I only get back literally penny's for each kWh.
If you stop off at a rest stop in Death Valley (any middle of nowhere) and discover the place has power from the grid. The utility company did NOT run a 120/240 volt single phase residential service 300 miles to that location. They would get 1 volt (ok exaggerating here) out of it. They ran a 4160 single wire (most likely) with a ground wire on top of the pole (for lightning strikes). If larger service is need they will run three phase.
If anyone else wants to explain transformer windings and how they work to Peter7 go right ahead. He can google for his own info in my opinion. Tesla (the man) wrote the book on that stuff already.
If places are remote there is a chance the utility company is going to bill the owner for the larger 4160 to 480 volt transformer to up service size from 100 to 200 amp. Those things are hellishly expensive and, many times in rural locations, purchased by the customer and maintained by the utility company.
They also charge for the poles that are run across private property. Once the power leaves the utility easement the cost is transferred to the customer. That's the sucky part... but it is typically cheaper than buying batteries and inverters :-)
Thanks for you response. I was under the impression, from a local EVSE provider that is deploying QCs, that it was difficult to find hosts who could guarantee 70+ amp, let alone 140+ amp availability.
I have heard costs for commercial 6.6 kW L2 charger install runs in the $15k range and an L3 (50 kW) is more like $500k without utility upgrades. I was thinking that $400k would buy a lot of batteries/inverters, but electrical is not my field of expertise so these numbers might be off.
As clear as your suggestion to others is to -
You specifically said,
"You are bringing a minimum of 4160 volt single phase to the location. A transformer will step it down to 480 volt three phase."
which I asked for an example of a transformer that will take SINGLE phase 4KV and convert it to THREE phase 480V.
Perhaps I misunderstood what you are saying or you misspoke?
And since we are suggesting the use of Google, perhaps not in your area, but in many others you will find horrendous use fees for commercial properties that exceed a set usage, and others that will bill for a year off of a peak usage draw in the previous year. Both make a raw supercharger connection very expensive. You should google some and see.
You guys are missing the obvious issue. Think three years in the future. I stop in for a change of my rode hard and put away wet battery, and its charged for use after I leave. You stop by later in your brand new 2016 S and your new battery you paid nearly a 20k bump over base for last month. You drop your new battery off, in exchange for mine and drive off, never to see your pack again.
Who wants to sign up for that?
Agreed. Swapping bad for that reason, plus those mentioned by others earlier, in my opinion.
I wouldn't be surprised if they've made an assumption that no more than a couple cars are going to need a supercharge at a given station in any, say 8 hour period. In that case it could be just the equivalent of a couple Model S batteries with a simple 40 amp connection to the grid, supplemented with solar panels. Those probably don't add much practical value but they look cool and make some people happy, so good for marketing at least.
Someone earlier pointed out that the batteries for supercharge stations may be cheaper since they don't have to fit in the space below the passenger compartment of your car, can be less than perfect at holding 100% charge, etc. That makes sense. They could essentially use the ones that fall short in QA for supercharger stations.
the only way to meet expectations -and to avoid "battery-stress-anxiety"- is the combination of battery-swapping and slow load with eco-power!
If You swap between two cities, You get a sudden full car within 2 minutes. While are You going on Your trip, Your original battery get's loaded, but slowlier (without battery-stress)..
on the way back You change the pack back!
Only in this combination You get the result of:
Fastest load AND no battery-stress!
So, there also is no issue with changing batterypacks, warranty etc...I think, the power will come from regenerative energysources through the grid. Are there major providers of eco-power in the states?
In germany we have "ökostrom-Anbieter". You get the power from the grid, but 100% clean power from wind, solar etc
"So, there also is no issue with changing batterypacks, warranty etc"
Just because you say it is so doesn't make it true, there are very real concerns about that. Say in 2017 I buy a Model S with an 85Kwh battery worth $30,000 (see what I did there ;) I then take it on a road trip from the factory back to my home state, on the way I swap the battery out at a supercharger and I get a 2012 battery which has been thrashed over the years and only has 80% of its charge left...you bet your life I have an issue with giving away my brand new battery pack I just bought for a heavily used one 5 years old. The reality is swapping will only work if they went with a "buy the car lease the battery" model and they haven't done that so battery swapping will not happen.
Your proposal presumes that drivers will be returning along the same route - which is not necessarily the case.
And I understand that many fans of Tesla are big believers in "clean energy", but most people will not sacrifice convenience for perceived eco-friendliness. At least, I won't.
From my personal experience using the 50 kW QCs for the LEAF, stopping for 10 - 20 minutes is really not that big of a deal as long as charger is located in a decent spot with some food options nearby.
It is actually better than the 5 - 10 minute gas stop. You have to stand out in the heat and man the pump to fill your ICE. WIth the QCs, you plug in and then go inside a store a grab something to eat or get a few grocery items.
I have brought lots of friends and relatives along during these QC stops and none have them felt like it was unpleasant. All of them have been shocked by how much range was added once we returned to the car. I usually play the game of guessing how much range was added while were in the store...everyone guesses low.
It will be a little different on a road trip with the Model S, but the 30 - 40 minute break will be welcomed especially if you have passengers on the trip.
I guess my point is, you have to break the mindset of standing next to your car for 30 minutes like when you fill a gas tank.
Just to be clear so Peter7 doesn't want me to invent a whole business... I really don't think battery swapping works right now in the US....
I think what Whitey is trying to describe is similar to what I suggested but no one reads it close enough.
If I live in St. Louis with a 60kw pack and I want to go to Florida, I would stop by the St. Louis service center and RENT an 85kw pack and they would care for and store my 60kw pack in St. Louis. Along my drive I can continue to rent more 85kw packs at swap station or service centers leaving the one I brought so no restocking needed... or I could just supercharge. When I return home to St. Louis I would go back to the service center and get my fully charge (well maybe not fully charged), inspected and tested battery back. The rental would include roadside assistance if I get a bad battery.
I do believe this service would be more costly than renting an ICE. I am not against it if it's practical and I would use the service if it was cost effective.
I don't think that the entire supercharger network will be in place from day 1. I'll bet they roll it out as the need arises, based on where the sales are going to. Others have speculated SoCal, and that makes sense. I live out here. The trips are: LA-SF, LA-Vegas, and LA to San Diego.
The thing is, you don't need say 10 geographically spread out supercharging stations between LA and SF, you only need 1. Granted, as they sell more cars, the station(s) need to be expandable. There is lots of empty space between LA and SF where you could install a single supercharging station, have it solar powered, and have it also be expandable. I would also agree with others that have posted that having a grid connect is likely mandatory. Having a large if not fully solar component out here not only makes sense, but gets Tesla good press too. You expand as needed, just like any other business.
I also agree that places like the Pacific Northwest that have abundant hydro should not even have a solar component. Hydro is renewable, so no point in putting up solar panels where the sun doesn't shine. You are still "green" if thats one of the goals.
Only 4 more days till we find out. I don't think that battery swap is in the cards at this time. I have heard on the other board that it might be possible for one to "rent" a larger battery for a long road trip, say if you have a 40kw version and want to do a longer trip. Getting your original battery back when you return. I would think in that case a trip to the local service center would be required. In many cases that is impractical, unless the service center is close by or on the way.
In the Northeast, there is lots of wind power available. It wouldn't be too hard to imagine Tesla buying a fixed % output of one of those wind farms for supplying a supercharger station, kind of like solar here is Ca. Grid backup required obviously, but you simply buy enough wind power over time to offset whatever the electric draw is.
Concerning Ivanpah (off topic): That single facility will double the amount of solar energy produced in California when it goes online. Getting from LA to Vegas will be no problem :-)
I believe that you have reversed kWh and kW throughout your post. KWh is accumulated energy (used or generated) over a time period, measured in 1000s of watt-hours. 1 W for 1000 hrs = 1 kW for 1 hour = 1 kWh.
I concur that supercharger station rollout will be incremental, although I'm not sure a supercharger is really required for LA-LV, since it's only 265 miles. You could drive fast and A/C cool, and with a level 2 charge for a lunch/stretch break, roll into your destination with a reasonable amount of charge.
In Washington (state) you will still have the roof, so you may as well have solar panels on it. Sure, west of the Cascade mountains they won't do much (but help keep you dry) in the winter, but in peak summer driving season there's 16 hours of daylight to make electrons. And east of the Cascades, there's not so much clouds year round.
I'm sure, that Tesla don't let one KW of usual power through their superchargers. No way.
This would be against their rules of using clean energy !
And the swapping stuff just works, if You change the pack back into Your own...
I bet you a beer on it. There will be a grid connection.
Elon is too smart to make an impractical system just to appeal to the fringe. Most people don't care where the power comes from, they just want the thing to work.
Those no-compromise, Earth-First, eco-terrorist types who will rebel against the use of any power not classified as "green" are probably living in a cave making clothing from their own feces and couldn't afford a Model S anyway. No sense sacrificing practicality for them.
Again, your swapping scheme requires that people visit the same place twice to reclaim their battery. Not practical unless that happens to be in one's travel plans already, which it often is not.
ok, it will be connected to the grid...but if they produce the same amount of juice or buy clean energy anywhere... there juice is clean. There will be one way or any other to get this issue fixed. There CI promise clean energy consumption, this is fix!
And for the battery swapping: For sure all my thoughts are pure speculation. We all can google for infos but until now, the supercharger is top secret (I love it).
If they do the swapping service, it will either way 1 (swapping pack and swap it back later) or way 2 (a company in coorporation - like better place with their kind of battery service)
Tuesday morning we all will know it )
You are probably right about the KW KWH swapping. I am trying to type these message out in less than a minute proof read them and submit before I get timed out and risk losing the message if I forget to copy it first.
Is it just me?
Have you missed my mentions of the Lazarus addon? I NEVER EVER lose a post. In fact, I have every post in the last year+ at my fingertips, even ones I decided to scotch.
Of course, if you use IE there's no help or hope for you. Of course.
While we all have experience with bad rechargable batteries, a major difference in the Model S design is that the battery is actually a grid of bricks, each containing many batteries.
Do we know how this battery system will degrade? Will it degrade uniformly? Or could the degradation be isolated to a subset of the bricks and then possibly to a subset of batteries within that brick?
If the degradation isn't uniform - and it's possible to restore battery function by replacing only a subset of the bricks - that could help to extend the life of the battery systems - and could also reduce the risk of getting a bad battery if there was a swapping option.
Thanks Brian H! I saw the post long ago and with no search feature I was not able to find it when I got home to my desktop computer. (use a tablet a lot) Installing.
Would be awesome if Telsa put a Supercharger in Michigan right where I need one! Drive on ICE 360 miles 5.5 hrs at ~80mph no stopping with 18.5 gal tank. I will have 85KWH battery on Sig S not Perf. So yes, drive slower, longer range. Stop around 230 miles, recharge... where? using what? and how long? Then finish 140 miles (allowing 10 miles for off and on highway).
All j1772 that I have researched along my trip route are 240-30A. This would take me 8.5 hrs to charge from near empty to 160 mile range. Allowing a buffer to ensure arrival at destination. If I can get a HPC hooked up to ChargePoint monitoring software then I could stop for 2.5 hours to recharge enough to finish the trip. Other Tesla owners could use it too. In talks with ChargePoint now.
If you are running FF, open "Addons" from Tools (or Ctrl-Shft-A). It provides a Search feature; typing any word will give you relevant optional addons currently available.
If you are talking about searching these posts, any search engine will restrict itself to a site or subsite if you include a string like this:
That one works for just this forum, of course.
Has anyone introduced Solar City to this discussion? I think they will play a major role. It would give them another footprint for feeding the grid with excess power generated vs power used.
Sorry. It could also shift the required investment away from Tesla on to the profitable shoulders of Solar City.
Solar City needs a contracted income stream for its installations. Where would that come from?
Two guesses, and the first one doesn't count. :-)