California breaks 1 GW energy storage milestone

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Battery placement in the Moss Landing turbine hall. Natural gas powered turbines once lived here.

 

As a preview of what that capacity has to offer, we’re getting our first glimpses via the California ISO Supply charts.

On July 9 at 6:30 PM, California’s main grid noted that energy storage injected 999 MW of power 

Note the battery charging periods, here too. As California’s daytime solar capacity grows, energy storage will increasingly arbitrage the cheap electricity to the point where energy storage may become the evening time’s baseload capacity.

https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2021/07/15/california-breaks-1-gw-energy-storage-milestone-and-looks-to-a-future-1-21-gw-moment/

Edited July 16, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[QuarterCenturyVet + 312]

Super. 

Now all you need is to create 710× that to power California every day for a year, let alone charge it every day for the amount of EVs you seem to think will be on the road. 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/05/f22/CA-Energy%20Sector%20Risk%20Profile.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjGp_7HgOfxAhXTrJ4KHXQNBmIQFnoECAUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2xqzvdph3C7UnFe6P5_FUw

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

12 minutes ago, QuarterCenturyVet said:

Super. 

Now all you need is to create 710× that to power California every day for a year, let alone charge it every day for the amount of EVs you seem to think will be on the road. 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/05/f22/CA-Energy%20Sector%20Risk%20Profile.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjGp_7HgOfxAhXTrJ4KHXQNBmIQFnoECAUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2xqzvdph3C7UnFe6P5_FUw

 

Actually about 100x. Our studies indicate we will need around 550GWh of storage by 2045 to go carbon free. Much of that will be technologies other than batteries. We are at about 5GWh right now.  

[Meredith Poor + 883]

5 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Natural gas powered turbines once lived here.

Are those gas turbines spinning in their graves?

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

DOE initiative seeks to drop long-duration storage cost 90% in a decade

 

• The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has set a goal to reduce the cost of utility-scale, long-duration energy storage by 90% within a decade to bolster a grid powered by renewable energy.
• The program, dubbed Long Duration Storage Shot will encourage development of systems with a duration of at least 10 hours, which can help mitigate the day-to-day and seasonal variability of renewable energy. A DOE official said the program will have a "technology-inclusive approach," including electrochemical, mechanical, thermal and chemical carrier sources. 
• The department will advance the cost-cutting goal by funding research and development at national labs, establishing large-scale demonstrations and deployments and encouraging more domestic manufacturing. The goal is the second in the administration's Energy Earthshots Initiative and fits into the crosscutting Energy Storage Grand Challenge.

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/doe-initiative-seeks-to-drop-long-duration-storage-cost-90-in-a-decade/603286/

[nsdp + 449]

53 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

DOE initiative seeks to drop long-duration storage cost 90% in a decade

 

• The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has set a goal to reduce the cost of utility-scale, long-duration energy storage by 90% within a decade to bolster a grid powered by renewable energy.
• The program, dubbed Long Duration Storage Shot will encourage development of systems with a duration of at least 10 hours, which can help mitigate the day-to-day and seasonal variability of renewable energy. A DOE official said the program will have a "technology-inclusive approach," including electrochemical, mechanical, thermal and chemical carrier sources. 
• The department will advance the cost-cutting goal by funding research and development at national labs, establishing large-scale demonstrations and deployments and encouraging more domestic manufacturing. The goal is the second in the administration's Energy Earthshots Initiative and fits into the crosscutting Energy Storage Grand Challenge.

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/doe-initiative-seeks-to-drop-long-duration-storage-cost-90-in-a-decade/603286/

Actually the NERC system reliablity requirements  for system reliability or the WECC are 48 hours. For ERCOT now that no one has fuel oil storage any more is 100 hours.   PJM has a hefty requirement also due to Hurricane Sandy.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

13 minutes ago, nsdp said:

Actually the NERC system reliablity requirements  for system reliability or the WECC are 48 hours. For ERCOT now that no one has fuel oil storage any more is 100 hours.   PJM has a hefty requirement also due to Hurricane Sandy.

Well our standard battery installation today only has 4 hours, for covering the evening peak. The next goal is 10 to 12 hours to get us through the night. Then 100 hours to carry us through a multi day extreme event.

Edited July 16, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[nsdp + 449]

5 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Well our standard battery installation today only has 4 hours, for covering the evening peak. The next goal is 10 to 12 hours to get us through the night. Then 100 hours to carry us through a multi day extreme event.

You expecting a freeze like we had in February soon?   I think the thermal derate for overheating will get you first.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

California ISO has 80GW of solar, 15GW of wind and 148GW of storage in its queue, smashing last year’s figures

https://www.pv-tech.org/california-iso-adds-80gw-of-solar-and-148gw-of-storage-to-its-queue-smashing-last-years-figures/

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Tesla Megapack is now available for online ordering! Now we have a benchmark for grid battery storage.

https://www.tesla.com/megapack

 

Edited July 18, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[nsdp + 449]

Better save a few tens of millions for site clean up.

Quote

for

Quote

Quote

 

 

 

 

[NickW + 2,714]

On 7/16/2021 at 7:57 AM, QuarterCenturyVet said:

Super. 

Now all you need is to create 710× that to power California every day for a year, let alone charge it every day for the amount of EVs you seem to think will be on the road. 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/05/f22/CA-Energy%20Sector%20Risk%20Profile.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjGp_7HgOfxAhXTrJ4KHXQNBmIQFnoECAUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2xqzvdph3C7UnFe6P5_FUw

As EV batteries come to the end of their vehicle life they still have 2-3 decades of useful life for static storage. These will provide an ever increasing supply of storage capacity. 

Additional benefits of this is:

• They have some resale value
• Concentrating in storage facilities aids recycling further down the line
• The 2nd life use will help build up the economies of scale for a recycling industry

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

How do you calculate the financial yield on a battery? Honest question. I don't know. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

34 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

How do you calculate the financial yield on a battery? Honest question. I don't know. 

Pretty much like any other producer. They have capex, opex, cost of electricity they purchase and price of electricity they sell. I think the hardest thing to know from an outside perspective is what their revenue is as there is a whole stack of electricity services that they sell into.

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

2 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Pretty much like any other producer. They have capex, opex, cost of electricity they purchase and price of electricity they sell. I think the hardest thing to know from an outside perspective is what their revenue is as there is a whole stack of electricity services that they sell into.

So it's about storing power that would otherwise be sold at a lower price? I would imagine the yield would be the difference in price * yearly discharge = revenue before expenditures. Then take off expenses and divide by capex? 

Edited July 21, 2021 by KeyboardWarrior

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

45 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

So it's about storing power that would otherwise be sold at a lower price? 

That is the bulk sales model that is most interesting for the renewable energy transition however there are other markets such as frequency regulation that batteries excel at because of fast response. See https://mugrid.com/battery-revenue-stacking/ and https://www.utilitydive.com/news/whats-the-value-of-energy-storage-its-complicated/407498/ from there you can go down the rabbit hole.

 

Edited July 21, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Boston startup Form Energy developed technology to address this need, revealing recently the chemistry behind their iron-air batteries. The company said its iron-air batteries can deliver renewables-sourced electricity for 100 hours at system costs competitive with conventional power plants. At full-scale production, Form Energy said the modules would deliver electricity at tenth the cost of lithium-ion batteries.

The iron-air battery is composed of cells filled with thousands of iron pellets that are exposed to air and create rust. The oxygen is then removed, reverting the rust to iron. Controlling this process allows the battery to be charged and discharged.

$200 million in Series D funding has been secured for the project, led by $25 million from ArcelorMittal’s XCarb innovation fund. ArcelorMittal will non-exclusively supply the iron materials for the battery system production, and Form Energy said it intends to source its iron domestically, manufacturing the batteries near where the iron was sourced.

The battery’s first project is a 1 MW installation with Minnesota-based utility Great River Energy, located near the American Iron Range. Form Energy said it expects to have a 300 MW, 500 module facility active at a Great River Energy power plant by 2023.

[nsdp + 449]

6 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Boston startup Form Energy developed technology to address this need, revealing recently the chemistry behind their iron-air batteries. The company said its iron-air batteries can deliver renewables-sourced electricity for 100 hours at system costs competitive with conventional power plants. At full-scale production, Form Energy said the modules would deliver electricity at tenth the cost of lithium-ion batteries.

The iron-air battery is composed of cells filled with thousands of iron pellets that are exposed to air and create rust. The oxygen is then removed, reverting the rust to iron. Controlling this process allows the battery to be charged and discharged.

$200 million in Series D funding has been secured for the project, led by $25 million from ArcelorMittal’s XCarb innovation fund. ArcelorMittal will non-exclusively supply the iron materials for the battery system production, and Form Energy said it intends to source its iron domestically, manufacturing the batteries near where the iron was sourced.

The battery’s first project is a 1 MW installation with Minnesota-based utility Great River Energy, located near the American Iron Range. Form Energy said it expects to have a 300 MW, 500 module facility active at a Great River Energy power plant by 2023.

Jay , there is one fatal flaw with  what most EE's want to do with batteries.  At least these won't explode and catch fire.  Unless they use  motor/generator sets instead of electronic inverters for DC to AC conversion, each battery installation destabilizes the grid. Impact of Inverter Based Generation on Bulk Power System Dynamics and Short-Circuit Performance https://resourcecenter.ieee-pes.org/publications/technical-reports/PES_TR_7-18_0068.html   Inertial instability ranked third after NG failures and frozen coal piles as the major cause of Texas generation losses in Feb.  Electronics failure rates are higher in hot weather than cold weather. CAISO already has major parallel path  issues blocking power transfers; battery inverter sets increase risk exponentially. I sat for 5 years as one of two independent members of the WECC Constraints and Needs Committee reporting to NERC. Having watched the CEC, CPUC and CAISO operate, I am not sure you could find two brain cells to rub together among the three of them. CPUC only approved replacement of three towers out of 35 in the Paradise line that caused the 2018 fire.  All should have been replaced in 1995. The CEC should be assigned to the Space Force at Cheyenne Mountain.  Caiso is smarter than the other two but too timid in pointing out  CEC and CPUC mistakes.

Edited July 24, 2021 by nsdp
typos

[nsdp + 449]

On 7/21/2021 at 5:18 PM, Jay McKinsey said:

That is the bulk sales model that is most interesting for the renewable energy transition however there are other markets such as frequency regulation that batteries excel at because of fast response. See https://mugrid.com/battery-revenue-stacking/ and https://www.utilitydive.com/news/whats-the-value-of-energy-storage-its-complicated/407498/ from there you can go down the rabbit hole.

 

It is about capturing and using electric power that would be wasted. Price is not the key. For example in 2017, China generated 270,000 GWH fron solar and wind but could not use it.  You will need storage PROPERLY CONFIGURED  to provide inertial  mass for the grid stability. Deferrals of upgrades is not really a benefit. When you still have 2400/4160 volt and other major utilities replaced it 50 years ago with at least 7200/12.474 kv distribution, (19kv/34.5kv is NERC standard for the last 15 years) some regulators are penny wise and pound foolish. The energy saved by cutting line resistance losses would have paid for the upgrade 25 years ago. Continuing to use 2400/4160 volt distribution is very brown and definitely not green.  Bet they don't think about how much natural gas they waste  and how much CO2 they produce maintaining low voltage distribution.

Edited July 24, 2021 by nsdp
typo

[nsdp + 449]

On 7/16/2021 at 5:11 AM, Meredith Poor said:

Are those gas turbines spinning in their graves?

The CPUC and the CEC are idiots if they are. They should be used as synchronous condensers. SDGE helped pioneer this.  http://www.sdgenews.com/article/innovation-spotlight-syncons

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

1 hour ago, nsdp said:

Jay , there is one fatal flaw with  what most EE's want to do with batteries.  At least these won't explode and catch fire.  Unless they use  motor/generator sets instead of electronic inverters for DC to AC conversion, each battery installation destabilizes the grid. Impact of Inverter Based Generation on Bulk Power System Dynamics and Short-Circuit Performance https://resourcecenter.ieee-pes.org/publications/technical-reports/PES_TR_7-18_0068.html   Inertial instability ranked third after NG failures and frozen coal piles as the major cause of Texas generation losses in Feb.  Electronics failure rates are higher in hot weather than cold weather. CAISO already has major parallel path  issues blocking power transfers; battery inverter sets increase risk exponentially. I sat for 5 years as one of two independent members of the WECC Constraints and Needs Committee reporting to NERC. Having watched the CEC, CPUC and CAISO operate, I am not sure you could find two brain cells to rub together among the three of them. CPUC only approved replacement of three towers out of 35 in the Paradise line that caused the 2018 fire.  All should have been replaced in 1995. The CEC should be assigned to the Space Force at Cheyenne Mountain.  Caiso is smarter than the other two but too timid in pointing out  CEC and CPUC mistakes.

Virtual inertia with grid forming inverters: https://reneweconomy.com.au/virtual-inertia-in-practice-how-south-australias-second-big-battery-made-its-mark-12934/

PG&E has also begun rolling this out.

[turbguy + 1,391]

I honestly cannot see any technical issue with power electronics providing a near-identical "match" between inertia provided via rotating equipment vs battery storage.

It may not be cheap.

It may take further development for short circuit ride-through and the like.

And it doesn't require lube oil, either.

That said, Moss Landing should have reserved several units as synchronous condenser duty.

[nsdp + 449]

8 hours ago, turbguy said:

I honestly cannot see any technical issue with power electronics providing a near-identical "match" between inertia provided via rotating equipment vs battery storage.

It may not be cheap.

It may take further development for short circuit ride-through and the like.

And it doesn't require lube oil, either.

That said, Moss Landing should have reserved several units synchronous condenser duty.

The problem comes when there is a grid fault and the phases go asynchronous  producing zero or negative  sequence power.https://circuitglobe.com/zero-sequence-current.html and https://circuitglobe.com/phase-shift-in-star-delta-transformer.html The unique structure  of quantum mechanics allows for only whole energy levels; you cannot  exist between two levels or go  backward. Starting at 15 minutes and ends at 22minutes Jim Al-Kahlili explains the discontinuity between the  world of newtonian physics and subatomic quantum physics. Ernest Rutherford and Neils Bohr discovered this over 100 years ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOJFznzSZhM  

Edited July 24, 2021 by nsdp
correct link

[nsdp + 449]

8 hours ago, turbguy said:

I honestly cannot see any technical issue with power electronics providing a near-identical "match" between inertia provided via rotating equipment vs battery storage.

It may not be cheap.

It may take further development for short circuit ride-through and the like.

And it doesn't require lube oil, either.

That said, Moss Landing should have reserved several units as synchronous condenser dut

The batteries provide the emf to power both the electronics and MG sets.  The concern is how you convert the DC power to AC.

[nsdp + 449]

16 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Virtual inertia with grid forming inverters: https://reneweconomy.com.au/virtual-inertia-in-practice-how-south-australias-second-big-battery-made-its-mark-12934/

PG&E has also begun rolling this out.

Yes with a NERC grid reliability exception.