Talk:Home energy storage

Issues with the article possibily suggesting deletion

@Simonjon: I have the following issues:
a) the title is wrong, it should be Home PV electricity storage or maybe PV electricity storage in the homes; also heat is stored and is energy, and electricity is originated at homes also with cogenerating systems
b) the article looks like a how to do or lifestyle advocacy, not really encyclopedic
c) there are also advertising traits (the Notable manufacturers section)
d) it is true that electrical grids have transmission losses, but they are one order lower than chemical cycle storage losses
e) EV recharging overnight has nothing to do with storage and anyway the twin chemical cycle wastes almost half the energy converted from the sun
f) exploiting of differential tariff with storage does not stand or is badly explained (I am not sure to have understood)
g) mains frequency power (not energy) grid support by home storage is technically questionably at the best
h) the Disadvantages section describes advantages, adding to the advertising style perception
i) the usable content could be better merged as a subsection in the relevant energy storage section
I am leaning toward merging as per point i). --Robertiki (talk) 19:10, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

@Robertiki:

• You assume that home energy storage is exclusively about photovoltaics, which is incorrect. There are companies out there developing home storage batteries that charge and discharge from the grid, to reduce bottlenecks and provide ancillary energy services. They are a downstream equivalent to grid tied batteries, that happen to be able to connect to PV.
• The manufacturers section has been removed by another user.
• If you think a disadvantage is an advantage, then move it.
• "is technically questionably at the best" is your opinion, but there are companies doing it, and your personal opinion is not the point of Wikipedia.
• Your points are not grounds for deletion or merging. Editing is the route. Either way you must propose merging rather than simply doing it. --Simonjon (talk) 09:43, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

a) I assume what the article content is, which is about PV electricity. I read:

The stored energy commonly originates from on-site solar photovoltaic panels, generated during daylight hours, and the stored electricity consumed after sundown, when domestic energy demand peaks in homes unoccupied during the day.

Anyway, I have no problems to settle with Home electricity storage or maybe Electricity storage in the homes. Your argument "There are companies out there developing home storage batteries that charge and discharge from the grid, to reduce bottlenecks and provide ancillary energy services." does not answer my questions.

b) Not addressed

c) Manufacturers section removed, good.

d) Not addressed (factual error)

e) Not addressed (illogical)

f) Not addressed (you have to give an explanation, otherwise delete)

g) No personal opinion, but a technical evaluation: mains frequency power support requires a tight grid connection and availability, and I doubt that uncommitted home users are such dependable. Tesla PowerWall, for example, are beautiful and functional units, perfect for an off-the-grid lifestyle, but, I would never trust on them as a last dike to stop a pending blackout on the larger grid.

h) It was a remark on the writing style, putting obvious advantages as disadvantage is an old trick; where have you read what you wrote ?

i) That my points are not ground for deletion or merging is your legitimate opinion. I don't agree, having hoped a more constructive reply from you.

I have not done any merging, or touched the article, and instead proposed it. I would like to point out that I could had gone straight to the discussion for the deletion, but have I preferred first a direct approach with the single article editor. --Robertiki (talk) 18:57, 9 November 2017 (UTC)