Tesla Powerwall 2

[Sunking]

I haven't been banned anywhere that I can recall

Here is your new sign and label to wear Dan: Liar Liar Pants on Fire. This is the third time you have been banned here. Take a hint, get lost.

Last I checked, JPM and SK strongly disagree that human actions are causing climate change;

Again you are a liar just like your science.

[Sunking]

Sunking How about we educate people the best we can and not call them names ( idiot )

Do you still want to defend Dan and try to educate a fool?

[jflorey2]

I don't think jflorey2's scenario is very likely, offhand.

I think it is very likely. We are already paying millions so that Arizona takes our power. What will happen when we double the amount of solar generation?

The expected benefit is about 2x the expected cost on average

That's true - now. When the grid can't handle any more solar it won't be so true.

There's a reason that utilities are pushing hard for phase 3 of rule 21 - so they can shut people down to prevent overgeneration on the grid. That's already being done in other countries where they have an overgeneration problem.

and I doubt east-facing arrays won't have as bad a value penalty as you fear.

It does if you have to shut down in the mornings, when production from an east facing array is highest.

This law is a perfect example of some well-meaning people who want solar not thinking through the problem. "Solar is good so let's make it a law that people have to have it!" The sad thing is that we've made this mistake before, and it came back to bite us then, just as it will now. A little thinking could have resulted in much better solutions that would:

-impact poor people less
-use the market, not law, to make change
-drive innovation in the solar market overall

But, as all who refuse to learn the lessons of history, looks like we are just going to repeat our mistakes.

[Kingram]

Do you still want to defend Dan and try to educate a fool?

Yes I still support Dan to have a voice on here , we are not going to agree all the time and maybe you should take JPM advice when he says take what you like and scrap the rest . What I don't support is your bashing of someone who doesn't agree with you by calling them a FOOL , IDIOT , MORON , LIAR ,GET LOST and ARE YOU BANNED YET ? really ?? are we back in Junior high school again ? Come on man lets keep it civil. I love a healthy discussion of different thoughts and ideas.

[Sunking]

Yes I still support Dan to have a voice on here ,.

OK I understand you support a liar, who believes in junk science and social engineering, uses propaganda, and taxing people into submission. Got it. Glad you make your position clear.

[DanKegel]

J.P.M., I do think I misstated your position a bit on whether humans cause climate change;
solarpaneltalk.com/forum/off-grid-solar/solar-living/18672-is-solar-green?p=346087#post346087
indicates that you're in principle undecided, but have a, uh, low opinion of current climate science, let's leave it at that.
And Mike - a moderator! - agrees, calling it "junk science".
solarpaneltalk.com/forum/off-grid-solar/batteries-energy-storage/general-batteries/334083-tesla-powerwall-2?p=376576#post376576

So, Kingram, thanks for the support. Folks who agree with mainstream science have to tread pretty carefully on this board.
(See also solarpaneltalk.com/forum/solar/the-pros-and-cons-of-solar-energy/351278-tucson-utility-signed-100mw-ppa-at-4-5-cents-per-kwh
for a little history; SK and JPM have been at this for a while; SK even got banned back in 2015 for a while for taking the disagreement too far.
It's really hard to pin them down on what exactly they claim I post that is incorrect.)

[Sunking]

Would one of you Moderators just Ban Dan and get it over with.

[Mike90250]

J.P.M., I do think I misstated your position a bit on whether humans cause climate change;
solarpaneltalk.com/forum/off-grid-solar/solar-living/18672-is-solar-green?p=346087#post346087
indicates that you're in principle undecided, but have a, uh, low opinion of current climate science, let's leave it at that.
And Mike - a moderator! - agrees, calling it "junk science".
solarpaneltalk.com/forum/off-grid-solar/batteries-energy-storage/general-batteries/334083-tesla-powerwall-2?p=376576#post376576

So, Kingram, thanks for the support. Folks who agree with mainstream science have to tread pretty carefully on this board.
(See also solarpaneltalk.com/forum/solar/the-pros-and-cons-of-solar-energy/351278-tucson-utility-signed-100mw-ppa-at-4-5-cents-per-kwh
for a little history; SK and JPM have been at this for a while; SK even got banned back in 2015 for a while for taking the disagreement too far.
It's really hard to pin them down on what exactly they claim I post that is incorrect.)

Sadly Dan, the link you posted closest to my name, is not mine, nor could I find your claim at the other link.
This a now a permanent ban, it will not expire unless another mod or admin finds entertainment in your posts and manually un-bans you.
While ideas are not bad or scary, it's the religious fervor that accompanies them, misleading neophytes, and giving RE a black eye because
of your poorly thought out schemes and hare brained ideas. I find your misleading posts more trouble to plow through than their worth.
You may like science, but you sure do not understand it. I've banned you temporarily several times, thinking you might change and play nicely.

[jflorey2]

The new powerwall appears to be the new standard for solar with battery.

To get away from Dan-bashing and back to the original topic, I recently ran some quick numbers for cost-per-KWHR for some popular Li battery options.

Battleborn $741
Victron $1031
Tesla powerwall $437
SimpliPhi $956
Panasonic RES10 series $660-740
Iron Edison LiFePO4 $1225
CALB raw cells $450
Orison Panel $545 (vaporware so far)
Tesla salvage (raw packs) $212

I spoke to a few installers in Hawaii (Maui) and San Diego. Per them they've done a few hundred installations each with the Powerwall so it's becoming available. Wait times for new batteries are about three months.

[J.P.M.]

J.P.M., I do think I misstated your position a bit on whether humans cause climate change;
solarpaneltalk.com/forum/off-grid-solar/solar-living/18672-is-solar-green?p=346087#post346087
indicates that you're in principle undecided, but have a, uh, low opinion of current climate science, let's leave it at that.

Took you long enough to find it huh ?

Allow me to clarify my position so you won't continue to misrepresent it.

No Dan, you don't think. At least, IMO anyway, not logically, or at least not logically most of the time . As I wrote then, I'm undecided. I misstated nothing. Think about it Dan: Kind of hard for me to give something I don't have (yet), like a well formed opinion. That's one example, among many I could cite, of why I accuse you of trying to put words in my mouth or arrogantly and rudely telling others what my opinions are. Stop doing it. Get a more cosmopolitan view of the world and get out of yourself 1X/awhile. Maybe you'll see how ignorant you look to some of those who know more about science, engineering and R.E. than you do. Suit yourself.

As for what my thoughts and M.O. on climate change may be: If/when I ever get to such a conclusion as to whether or not climate change of the sort many seem to believe exists actually does exist, and if so, what the forceS or inputS (note plural) driving any such change might be, I'll be sure to let you know. As for "overwhelming evidence", most everyone once thought the world was flat and most were mandated to believe in an earth centered universe. Real science put those notions out to pasture. I'm betting on real science to do the same and get a better handle on what, if anything, may be happening to earth's climate. But that's not junk science of the sort you seem to be convinced is gospel.

As for safety or surety in numbers, I once heard an old saying that 50 million Frenchmen can't be wrong. Well, then I heard they're surrender monkeys who fight with their feet and make love with their faces. Such is much of the content and truth in old sayings, or at least the "overwhelming evidence" part.
.
Until I do form an opinion as to causeS, of any possible climate change, whatever it may mean and however it may be defined, the jury is out for me. Is something happening ? Maybe. Is it perhaps or at least partially human caused ? Maybe. Is what some think they see short term ? Maybe. Do we (or I) have enough confidence in those who say the sky is falling to act on what they say ?

Maybe not. At least not without testable hypotheses and a lot less hype and fear mongering that only serves to make me more skeptical of the science, a lot of the motive of some of its practitioners, and so, more skeptical yet of at least some of the science.

I see more emotion and attempts at manipulation of people's emotions than I see of logic in too many and too much of the what you and the other unthinking and melon headed minions and ignorant dupes, unwitting shills and mouthpieces for emotion based conclusions have to offer.

But, because I'm curious, but hopefully logical, or at least more logical than those who can have their opinion swayed by the last thing someone poured or brainwashed into their head, I'll use some tenants of the scientific method as I learned it and logic as I may have studied it long ago, and begin with a definition of what climate change actually is (Do you have a working definition of what you have been told is the problem, or a goal in mind Dan, or, something that you can only repeat or paraphrase like most of the rest of your stuff ?).

Then, I'll form a null hypothesis that climate does not exist, and then do what amounts to some hypothesis testing in the form of seeing what the evidence on both or all sides might be. If, and only after a fair amount of that type of information gathering and thought and more study, probably with and after more iterative adjustment in thinking, I come to what I believe is a logical conclusion and find that the evidence leads me to the opinion that my null hypothesis, if correctly formulated, results in a logical fallacy, I'll reject it, and say climate change seems to be happening.

I may then, and only then, begin to formulate some opinions as to causeS, and still further down the road, any remedies.

Until then, I try to keep an open mind and err on the side of what I think I might be seeing (all the while subject to being wrong, but not letting that paralyze analysis, action or progress more than necessary) and support a path that tends to minimize use of resources, and thus/also tends toward increasing the entropy of the planet at the slowest rate possible (any clue about what that means Dan ?), if for no other reason than that more jobs will be created. An aside: Outfits I once worked for often got a significant contribution to their bottom line by engineering and supplying mandated (and thus usually overpriced) equipment and systems that were often thought by some of us to be blatantly obvious wastes whose primary and sometimes only reasons for existence were the result of nothing more or little better than bureaucratically inspired white collar welfare. A part of the world you are probably utterly and completely ignorant of.

See Dan, I believe I may be seeing something, but I'm not at all convinced human activity is causing it, or some part of it, or how much of it, if any. and if so how to quantify it. And then, to the degree it may exist, how best to deal with it, if at all. For all I know, what some see as global warming may be no than what amounts to the equivalent of a temporally local fart in the wind - smells bad but doesn't stay around long.

Nor an I convinced the situation such as it may seem to exist is as dire as the popular press and those with money to make and influence to peddle would have us all believe.

Take what you want of the above. Scrap the rest.

[Sunking]

SK and JPM have been at this for a while; SK even got banned back in 2015 for a while for taking the disagreement too far.
It's really hard to pin them down on what exactly they claim I post that is incorrect.)

Poor little Dan, all sweat and Innocent has a little problem with honesty and facts. Example here is a whopper of a fish tale you told right here in this thread.

Not sure what to say to SK's tirade, or JPM's charges.
I haven't been banned anywhere that I can recall

Let me help you with your selective memory. You were permanently banned the very first day you showed up here in 2014 by Russ. 3 temporary bans since that time now permanent again. Only reason you got back the first time is because Russ bragged about it on the Forum, he already knew you were a fraud and checked you out. The new at the time owners felt sorry for you when you complained and threatened legal action. Yep I go banned for a week riding your butt when I posted public information about you and the lies you tell. Try the truth Dan it will set you free. The only truth you have ever spoken here is in your signature.

I like science

To bad the science you believe is Junk Science you made up. Like an actor on TV: "I am not a doctor but I play one on TV". Play time is over Dan, you are not an Actor on TV, you are a liar and every Moderator knows it and hung you with your own rope I gave you . Have fun on Fantasy Island.

BYE!

[J.P.M.]

To get away from Dan-bashing and back to the original topic, I recently ran some quick numbers for cost-per-KWHR for some popular Li battery options.

Battleborn $741
Victron $1031
Tesla powerwall $437
SimpliPhi $956
Panasonic RES10 series $660-740
Iron Edison LiFePO4 $1225
CALB raw cells $450
Orison Panel $545 (vaporware so far)
Tesla salvage (raw packs) $212

I spoke to a few installers in Hawaii (Maui) and San Diego. Per them they've done a few hundred installations each with the Powerwall so it's becoming available. Wait times for new batteries are about three months.

Not arguing, but what kWh in the $/kWh are you using ? Also, are those retail costs before any incentive(s).

Thanx.

[jflorey2]

Not arguing, but what kWh in the $/kWh are you using ? Also, are those retail costs before any incentive(s).Thanx.

For battery packs - rated KWHR based on rated AH.
For raw cells - the cell's AH rating.

Retail costs before incentives.

[J.P.M.]

For battery packs - rated KWHR based on rated AH.
For raw cells - the cell's AH rating.

Retail costs before incentives.

Thank you.

[JohanVanR]

About Dan's ban: Freedom of speech is important to me, see also [1]. That includes writing texts that may contain mistakes on forums. And it can include the responsibility to set things straight when you realize that your text contains a mistake. So a ban should (I think) only be executed with great caution. In my opinion, in this case, a ban goes way too far. This does not mean that I always agree with Dan.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9PxdJNIc6w