Tesla Begins Construction Of World’s Largest Energy Storage Facility

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Tesla TSLA +4.7% and PG&E recently broke ground on a record-setting energy storage system in Moss Landing (Monterey) California that, once complete, will be the largest such installation in the world. The battery park will be able to dispatch up to 730 megawatt hours (MWh) of energy to the electrical grid at a maximum rate of 182.5 MW for up to four hours using 256 of Tesla’s lithium-ion (Li-ion) Megapacks. Tesla and PG&E will have the option to upgrade Moss Landing’s capacity to bring the system up to 1.2-gigawatt-hours which could, according to Tesla, power every home in San Francisco for six hours.

The facility is expected to come online in 2021

https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2020/08/13/tesla-begins-construction-of-worlds-largest-energy-storage-facility/#5fd638814fde

[markslawson + 1,042]

5 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

esla TSLA +4.7% and PG&E recently broke ground on a record-setting energy storage system in Moss Landing (Monterey) California that, once complete, will be the largest such installation in the world. The battery park will be able to dispatch up to 730 megawatt hours (MWh) of energy to the electrical grid at a maximum rate of 182.5 MW for up to four hours using 256 of Tesla’s lithium-ion (Li-ion) Megapacks.

Jay - for me the most astonishing part of this story is that there isn't any price tag on this project. Not even in the story from Forbes. What? Do you have any prices or costs on this thing? I looked at the other stories online and also couldn't see a price. That would normally be the first thing any journalist would ask. Also I see that its a joint announcement between Tesla and PG&E with Tesla's name first. So who's paying for this thing? If its PG&E as you would expect why is Tesla's name first, unless there's some sort of deal going on where Tesla still owns the batteries or something like that. In any case the story proves the exact opposite of the propaganda in it - so few of these battery projects are being built that its obvious they are not going to take over from conventional power. What may be happening is that they are taking up a fill-in role, where they provide power after the renewables have stopped working and the conventional plants are being ramped up to take their place. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

PG&E will own the facility at its substation in Moss Landing, but the design, construction and maintenance operations will be joint effort both by the San Francisco-based utility and the battery and EV manufacturing giant. 

https://www.power-eng.com/2020/07/29/energy-storage-milestone-pge-tesla-begin-building-730mwh-battery-system/#gref

They are public companies not gov't so they don't have to disclose the financial details. They are building this to make money.

So few being built???  There are numerous battery projects in the works and many more are being announced regularly. 

Hornsdale expansion is even done and you'll be glad to know that they plan on providing synthetic inertia to the Australian grid.

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

On Tuesday, in the latest series of tests, the Hornsdale battery did a rapid 270MW flip – from charging at 120MW to discharging at 150MW. It appears to have flipped between the two on several different occasions (see graph above) – at least one of which had an immediate impact on the wholesale price of electricity, pushing it down to the peppercorn price of just above $8/MWh.

Those 270MW flips – from the level of discharge to the level of charge – are likely a world record in both speed and extent of the change. And it’s this flexibility of the big batteries such as Hornsdale, and others at Dalrymple North, Lake Bonney, Gannawarra and Ballarat, that is particularly attractive to project owners and valuable to AEMO, the market operator.

AEMO has on several occasions noted the speed, accuracy and flexibility of the big battery in responding to big frequency changes – often when a major transmission line trips or is felled by a storm. This happened on August 25 when a major transmission line was struck by lightning, taking the Queensland grid and the South Australia grid out of the main market.

The Hornsdale battery initially responded to the Queensland trip by helping arrest the frequency diversion in one direction, before immediately changing direction when the South Australia grid isolated and it had to charge, rather than discharge, to deal with an over-frequency event. It can respond to such events at a far greater speed than fossil fuel generators.

The new testing on synthetic inertia, or virtual inertia as David Leitch explains in this excellent piece on the work being done already by the Dalrymple North battery, will prove yet another critical grid service and function that can be delivered by inverter-based technologies, and remove another important brick in the wall of the incumbent synchronous generators. The industry, in Australia and overseas, is watching with keen interest.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/tesla-big-battery-sets-new-record-as-testing-for-hornsdale-expansion-enters-final-stage-65376/

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

Lets see: "San Francisco area households paid an average of 24.0 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh) of electricity in June 2020,"

https://www.bls.gov/regions/west/news-release/averageenergyprices_sanfrancisco.htm

Holy Shit, that is TWICE what we pay here in Western Washington and 2.5X more than what people pay in the middle of the USA or down south in coal country...  Lets see, hrmm, will batteries help this cost... hell no it will not.  This works if the utility is trying to FORCE people to get off the grid as they are doing in Hawaii, where this is even worse of a problem due to no one using power during the day, but everyone wanting power at night, but everyone has solar panels.  Difference is California actually has enough sun year round to make this work.  Now if only that battery was matched to 12 hours or 16 hours duration instead of 4.  4 is a joke.  In reality this battery is 4X smaller than claimed. 

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Comparing the cost of electricity in a dense city to the cost out in the boondocks is silly. Yes the battery is going to make money for the utility which means it is saving money. How much of that cost reduction gets down to the consumer is a separate question not limited to the the technology.

I have no idea what you are talking about forcing people off the grid. Grid batteries add tremendous value to the grid making it a more desirable thing to be on.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

the graph from above article

[Rob Kramer + 696]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Comparing the cost of electricity in a dense city to the cost out in the boondocks is silly.

So it can provide a few houses 4 hours of electricity? Nothing burger if you ask me. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

2 hours ago, markslawson said:

Jay - for me the most astonishing part of this story is that there isn't any price tag on this project. Not even in the story from Forbes. What? Do you have any prices or costs on this thing? I looked at the other stories online and also couldn't see a price. That would normally be the first thing any journalist would ask. Also I see that its a joint announcement between Tesla and PG&E with Tesla's name first. So who's paying for this thing? If its PG&E as you would expect why is Tesla's name first, unless there's some sort of deal going on where Tesla still owns the batteries or something like that. In any case the story proves the exact opposite of the propaganda in it - so few of these battery projects are being built that its obvious they are not going to take over from conventional power. What may be happening is that they are taking up a fill-in role, where they provide power after the renewables have stopped working and the conventional plants are being ramped up to take their place. 

To the Green extremists cost is not a major concern. Getting their religion in place is more important. I am a natural gas advocate, cost and the environment are both important. I am not a CO2 panic advocate. I consider all deleterious factors: All costs, aesthetics, real pollution, waste disposal etc. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

20 minutes ago, Rob Kramer said:

So it can provide a few houses 4 hours of electricity? Nothing burger if you ask me. 

Actually it can power the whole sf bay area for an hour. So we just need about 10x this capacity to handle the whole bay area all through the night. We will have that built by 2030 at the latest. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Comparing the cost of electricity in a dense city to the cost out in the boondocks is silly. Yes the battery is going to make money for the utility which means it is saving money. How much of that cost reduction gets down to the consumer is a separate question not limited to the the technology.

I have no idea what you are talking about forcing people off the grid. Grid batteries add tremendous value to the grid making it a more desirable thing to be on.

Energy in a dense city should be less expensive because of scale of the operation. Natural gas plants are built in or right on the edge of the city. Natural gas is already available to and throughout all cities in America. Each home could produce their own electricity with a small turbine and no power lines. It would be the best possible grid.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

4 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Actually it can power the whole sf bay area for an hour. So we just need about 10x this capacity to handle the whole bay area all through the night. We will have that built by 2030 at the latest. 

You are avoiding addressing the cost. That seems to be your modus operandi. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Just now, ronwagn said:

You are avoiding addressing the cost. That seems to be your modus operandi. 

PG&E the utility says this battery will save $100 milllion over its 20 year lifespan. So the cost of the battery is $100 million less than the competition. PG&E is a publically owned company, they don't release all of their finances. They are planning on making a lot of money off of the battery.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

Just now, Jay McKinsey said:

PG&E the utility says this battery will save $100 milllion over its 20 year lifespan. So the cost of the battery is $100 million less than the competition. PG&E is a publically owned company, they don't release all of their finances. They are planning on making a lot of money off of the battery.

I am sure they will and the public will not save a dime a month. I promise you.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

1 minute ago, ronwagn said:

I am sure they will and the public will not save a dime a month. I promise you.

That may be but it is the same regardless of where the energy is coming from.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

That may be but it is the same regardless of where the energy is coming from.

But, why?! Use natural gas and individual small home turbines and natural gas or have local neighborhood turbines. It is the most redundant energy system possible. The energy is always available. No large grid is needed, it already exists almost everywhere in America or any developed nation. The turbine will provide free heat if set up properly, that is an added bonus in cold climes. Propane can be used in rural areas. Isolated towns can also use LNG or CNG shipped by truck or train. 

Cost to the customer, considering all factors, should be the prime consideration IMO. The biggest consumer is industry and they should consider their costs first also. The same applies to all transport since the customers and profits are the primary beneficiaries. 

My thought is that politicians are most interested in raising costs and taxes so they can distribute lower prices to their financial supporters in industry and the chosen technology. 

About microturbines:

https://www.wbdg.org/resources/microturbines

https://www.capstoneturbine.com/products/c30 Their smallest turbine, but they can be run in a series. 

Edited August 14, 2020 by ronwagn
addition

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

In June, a report from Aurecon noted that the Hornsdale Power Reserve had reduced costs in the main grid by $116 million through the provision of Contingency and Regulation Frequency Control Ancillary Services (FCAS), an important grid resource.

In particular, the report noted, thanks to the Hornsdale battery, average Regulation FCAS costs have been reduced by more than 90% (from $470/MWh to $40/MWh), meaning major saving on energy costs in South Australia. As we wrote soon after its initial commissioning, it did not take long to smash the existing gas cartel in that state.

And the report also noted the critical rule in plays in helping prevent catastrophic outcomes in separation events, such as on November 16 last year, and in January this year, when the state was then forced to operate as an “island” for more than two weeks.https://reneweconomy.com.au/tesla-big-battery-at-hornsdale-delivers-world-record-output-of-150mw-26392/

Edited August 14, 2020 by Jay McKinsey

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

37 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

But, why?! Use natural gas and individual small home turbines and natural gas or have local neighborhood turbines. It is the most redundant energy system possible. The energy is always available. No large grid is needed, it already exists almost everywhere in America or any developed nation. The turbine will provide free heat if set up properly, that is an added bonus in cold climes. Propane can be used in rural areas. Isolated towns can also use LNG or CNG shipped by truck or train. 

Cost to the customer, considering all factors, should be the prime consideration IMO. The biggest consumer is industry and they should consider their costs first also. The same applies to all transport since the customers and profits are the primary beneficiaries. 

My thought is that politicians are most interested in raising costs and taxes so they can distribute lower prices to their financial supporters in industry and the chosen technology. 

About microturbines:

https://www.wbdg.org/resources/microturbines

You need a large grid of natural gas pipes. Pacific Gas & Electric owns both the electric and gas networks. Why would they screw me on electricity but not gas?  Better off putting batteries in the neighborhoods to time shift electricity demand.  Trucking the gas and storing on site is definitely not going to make your solution the low cost option.

Edited August 14, 2020 by Jay McKinsey

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 minute ago, Jay McKinsey said:

You need a large grid of natural gas pipes. Pacific Gas & Electric owns both the electric and gas networks. Why would they screw you on electricity but not gas?  Better off putting batteries in the neighborhoods to time shift electricity demand.  Trucking the gas and storing on site is definitely not going to make your solution the low cost option.

The pipes already exist, all you need do is mass produce and install the turbine systems. You can also charge electric cars with it. It would definitely be the low cost solution, at least in any area needing heat or hot water. Your solution denies the waste heat in fossil fuels and its use. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Just now, ronwagn said:

The pipes already exist, all you need do is mass produce and install the turbine systems. You can also charge electric cars with it. It would definitely be the low cost solution, at least in any area needing heat or hot water. Your solution denies the waste heat in fossil fuels and its use. 

Yes the pipes exist but so do the power lines, why is PG&E going to overcharge me for electricity but not for gas? The waste heat just represents another cost component. Steam lines don't exist everywhere and would have to be installed at great expense.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

The power lines connecting to the cities do not exist as needed. They need to be built. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

I am sure that the homeless and illegal aliens, the last people left in California soon, will appreciate this technological breakthrough....

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

34 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I am sure that the homeless and illegal aliens, the last people left in California soon, will appreciate this technological breakthrough....

California to illegals:  We'll leave the light on.

Actually, just extend the wall up along the eastern border of California.  Jerry Brown likes the idea:

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/election/presidential-election/article66085062.html/video-embed

 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

That old story originated in Miami just after the Muriel Boatlift. Supposedly there was a billboard on the highway north out of the city that read, “ Would the last American leaving Miami please turn out the lights.”

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

19 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

That old story originated in Miami just after the Muriel Boatlift. Supposedly there was a billboard on the highway north out of the city that read, “ Would the last American leaving Miami please turn out the lights.”

I wasn't quoting a story, I made it up.