this post was submitted on 13 May 2024
311 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

34889 readers
98 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Of course it's relevant. My LiFePos reach about 92% efficiency. Losing 12% of energy in the storage process or not losing them is a big difference.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

The question is then whether it's cheaper to buy LiFePos instead of lead acid or to install more solar panels.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yep. But also you need to run lead acid in a smaller charge window so you need more of them and when running out of space more panels might not be feasible - many variables in the whole thing, I don't think there's a universal answer, one can't really get around setting up a small spreadsheet.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Agreed - it's not that there are no space constraints at all.