Worse, it sounds like the powerwall has its own inverter / rectumfier.
I think ultra high voltage DC is better for punching across distances. Although I remember reading somewhere the US has DC interconnects because the three grids run slightly different frequencies ...But it can't and anyway like 12V fridges you are better off wasting your losses with the higher quality power source. It makes no sense to go DC - AC - AC - DC. The US east west interconnect is a hateful thing.
NoI think ultra high voltage DC is better for punching across distances. Although I remember reading somewhere the US has DC interconnects because the three grids run slightly different frequencies ...
Which no? All the big transmission lines run DC. A good example of the new 2 Million volt DC transmission in China that punchs it across 3500kms
HVDC is more efficient (if by efficient you mean less transmission losses) on the same transmission infrastructure, but none of this is relevant to a Tesla power wall.I think ultra high voltage DC is better for punching across distances. Although I remember reading somewhere the US has DC interconnects because the three grids run slightly different frequencies ...
I was responding to your comment about the US interconnection- it’s DC for a good reason.HVDC can be more efficient. But as summit says that is not what is being discussed.
I don't think they're the end of the world but they do impact the financial viability of the product. When I looked at the first gen Tesla powerwall I needed the batteries to last for 15 years to break even and there was no guarantee that they would last that long based on what I would need the battery to do (I would need the battery to handle a full charge/discharge cycle every day). The new product has double the capacity so maybe it will break even in 7.5 years, but if say the double conversion makes it 15% less efficient then that pushes the break-even point out another year or so.And are transformation losses the end of the world?