TheEEStory.com

@Lowell. Do you live in Pincher Creek or Lethbridge? That must be the windiest %$@#$ing place on earth. lol.

@Lowell:

Solar energy with EESU storage will work out financially in just a few years in locations nearer to the equator. I myself live at 49° north and I have experience with solar energy in my home in these dark months. I can not make it pay for itself as an off grid installation in this location with current technology.

The price of solar panels ($/W) has fallen in the past years and if EESU's would be available for the promised cost/Watt it would become an interesting option for rural and even urban environments.

One thing many people forget: The energy and infrastructure cost for the grid will rise in the comming years because of scarcity and higher demand. In my opinion much more then the capital costs of an investment now.

What would work for me? First of all enough solar panels and storage to provide for all of my energy needs even on the bleakest winterdays. The rest of the year I could sell off the excess daytime energy to the grid to pay for the extra panels needed in winter.

These calculations are just for this location. Every step you get nearer to the equator a stand- alone combination of solar panels and an EESU would become cheaper because of higher solar radiation and better, more constant distribution of harvesting time over the year. In these locations a feedback option (and the infrastructure for that!) are not necessary so everything becomes much more cost effective and can pay for itself in just a few years.

The idea that serious LM types are embedding EESU into the name of software (SEEsuite) is farfetched IMO. If EESUs are a part of the energy storage mix in a few years then this may be a curious coincidence but currently it seems like software with a name that suggests visibility "SEE suite".

Maybe steve can properly decipher the hidden message.

The suggestion that LM may be quietly working on infrastucture to protects us from tactical power disruptions makes sense to me. I recall the effectiveness of us shorting out substations during the balkan war using conductive fibers. This put the populous in the dark and was very effective. Blackouts in this country have demostrated our severe vulnerability. Recent breeches of cyber security concerning our grid likely triggered an executive decision.
So what may seem like LM's foray into a new market may actually be body armor around our archilles heel.

Green? whatever you want to believe!

ricinro wrote:

The idea that serious LM types are embedding EESU into the name of software (SEEsuite) is farfetched IMO. If EESUs are a part of the energy storage mix in a few years then this may be a curious coincidence but currently it seems like software with a name that suggests visibility "SEE suite".

Finally! Someone applying some common sense. Serious corporations like LM do not pick brand names based on someone's lighthearted idea of a joke, nor do they subtly embed one brand name inside a longer brand name one as a "subliminal" message. If a brand name is part of a longer brand name, it's made very obvious-- like ZENNergy®.

But I guess this *is* what that LM press conference was about. It's easy to see that it could use EESU tech, but it clearly doesn't require EESUs.

Lensman wrote:

Finally! Someone applying some common sense. Serious corporations like LM do not pick brand names based on someone's lighthearted idea of a joke, nor do they subtly embed one brand name inside a longer brand name one as a "subliminal" message.

I fully agree that branding is an investment that corporations take seriously. I arrive at the opposite conclusion from that start ing point though: they take EESU technology so seriously that they put the word in their branding.

Given that they have exclusive rights to EESUs for the grid and that they know it works, why wouldn't they tie their brand to EEStor's?

I'm speculating and can't prove I'm right, but the converse holds for you too. Time will tell.

energy investor wrote:

Thanks for the post Hammer,

While we can be certain of the LM involvement in promoting inovation for smart grid technology, the article does not give a link to the EESU and the name SEEsuite atrikes me as being their attempt at humour.

Yes, if and when the EESU is delivered and revealed in all its glory (an event I anxiously await), and if LM have a deal with EEStor all tied up, then I suspect we will see a direct link.

At present, it strikes me that this link is speculative.

But I am sure that - if they are watching - this thread will have brought a smile to someone at LM's face :-)

Kind regards
ei

PS. But heck, what would that smile mean? LOL

EI -- I totally agree with you on the humor.

Notwithstanding my and others' earlier comments on LM being a very active and engaged EEStor partner, I think these name similarities are just a coincidence.

Grazzhoppa wrote:

@Lowell. Do you live in Pincher Creek or Lethbridge? That must be the windiest %$@#$ing place on earth. lol.

Easily in the top ten of the windiest places on Earth!

SEEsuite <-> sEESUite ?

It is either not coincidence or they are having a laugh at our expense! You choose?

Last edited Tue, 26 Jan 2010, 4:08pm by EEcosse

I can see the tagline now: SEEsuite, powered by EESU.

LM smirks all round. They had their tongue firmly in cheek when they named "SEEsuite" considering the application could make use of ESSU's.
Has eestor trademarked "essu"? A piece of the puzzle Yes.

http://tess2.uspto.gov/
search for EESU.
zennergy is a fun search too.
:)

StephenB wrote:

I can see the tagline now: SEEsuite, powered by EESU.

A coincidence that SEESuite = EESU inside:) ? I like this patriotic red-white-blue color scheme for LM's marketing campaign.

Noticed this summary document that was produced on the 2nd February:

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/isgs/...

Thanks for the link EEcosse.

The summary document clearly shows that SEESuite is a tool for managing large electrical grids and has nothing to do with EESUs. Microgrids are managed as an input to SEESuite, and are not managed themselves by this tool.

Oakthicket wrote:

Thanks for the link EEcosse.

The summary document clearly shows that SEESuite is a tool for managing large electrical grids and has nothing to do with EESUs. Microgrids are managed as an input to SEESuite, and are not managed themselves by this tool.

I agree that SEESuite is a combination of tools for 'Smart Grid Management', and the package on offer as yet has nothing to do with EESU's. However, there are many references to storage, which is important. Storage will become an increasingly vital part of how our electricity is managed when a relatively cheap way of storing energy is developed i.e EESU's. Of course other storage technologies exist but they are expensive to deploy and will only have a marginal impact, IMO. An EESU however. That is a different matter.

Hello EEcosse

Currently energy storage has a huge impact on the electrical grid.

Hydroelectric dams routinely change output by using stored energy (water) behind their dams. Once the dam is built, this storage is not expensive to deploy. The only reason dams are built is for energy storage. Run-of-the-river hydro plants have no storage and are very cheap. I don't have exact numbers but would estimate a cost of a ROTR plant to be less than 10% of the equivalent hydro plant with a dam.

Natural gas fired power plants routinely use caverns as energy storage. Cost is pennies per MMSCF.

Oil storage for power generation is not as significant but is used for emergency generation in dual-fuel power plants and is modelled in electricity management software.

Coal storage is not normally represented in grid-wide software management programs.

I should mention that this is not an opinion. It's the way it is in Canada and the United States.

To give you a feel for the extent of natural gas underground storage, check out this link.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/natural_gas/ngs/...

Note the seasonal swings from 1.2 - 4 trillion cubic feet. This is because natural gas inventories go up in the summer and go down in the winter. Much of this storage is for home heating, but a significant amount is for power generation.

This data does not include natural gas storage from pipeline line pack or point of source production storage at gas wells.

For me gas storage and oil storage do not count. To me they are fuel stores (energy in one form) that can be converted to another form (electricity) when required. Additionally, they are sources of carbon emmissions which do not help in the decarbonisation of the grid.

Where I think EESU's will be key is in storing electricity that has been generated, but for one reason or another is not demanded at the time of generation. If large amounts of renewables are to be placed on the grid we will need this kind of storage more and more.