On 31/07/18 07:46, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 20:43:50 +0200
> Axel Berger  wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> even though those things are a *lot* more expensive than
>>> deep cycle lead/acid to put in).
>>
>> Initial sales price per nominal kWh of storage or lifetime cost over all
>> cycles until worn out?
>
>  Initial sales price - hence "to put in".
>
>> I'll accept the former but would want proof and numbers for the latter.
>
>  Li-Ion has a much better long term cost because of the longer life,
> OTOH I'm not sure it's worthwhile given the amount of battery technology
> research going on. It seems like pretty much every week someone is
> announcing something that outperforms Li-Ion in the lab, it may well be a
> reasonable bet that by the time a new Lead/Acid install is worn out there
> will be something much better than Li-Ion to replace it with.
>
NBone of the hundred or so LI-Ion batteries I have had have outlasted my
car battery.

500 cycles is usially the half life (down to half capacity) or a lot
less if exercised heavily.


--
Karl Marx said religion is the opium of the people.
But Marxism is the crack cocaine.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05