Solar and storage projects drive utility-scale deployment of batteries: Navigant(utilitydive.com)
utilitydive.com
Solar and storage projects drive utility-scale deployment of batteries: Navigant
https://www.utilitydive.com/news/solar-storage-projects-to-drive-utility-scale-deployment-of-batteries-na/551724/
17 comments
This is really great news for Tesla and seems to fit into the "mass production of industrial batteries makes them cheaper" narrative.
Now we should expect a growing investment in battery production, right? Or does the sinking cost reduce the potential profit too much, i.e. who would now invest 1000$ into a battery factory that produces at price x$/MWh?
Presently announced plans will triple battery production in the next 4 years
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/03/31/global-lithium-ion-batt...
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/03/31/global-lithium-ion-batt...
[deleted]
I don't understant why LI-ion batteries are being used in such locations. They are definitely better in terms of energy density, but when size/weight isn't a concern, why are oldschool lead acid batteries not competitive? They are cheap, well-understood, and easily recyclable at end of life. Lithiums are more expensive and difficult to recycle. I understand why they are favored in vehicles, but for massive grid installs?
Lead acids have very poor cycle life compared to lithium ion, unless you only use a small amount of their capacity such that the usable cost per kWh between the two are nearly the same.... but lithium ion prices have continued to reduce such that the usable price per kWh for lithium ion is now lower.
Additionally, the round trip efficiency of lithium ion batteries is higher than lead acid. Plus, the added weight of lead acid further increases installation costs. So when all is said and done, lithium ion is now superior to lead acid for grid storage.
Exceptions exist when the simplicity of managing a lead acid battery comes into play. Lithium ion batteries need to be babied. Lead acid can be just thrown onto a DC power bus.
Additionally, the round trip efficiency of lithium ion batteries is higher than lead acid. Plus, the added weight of lead acid further increases installation costs. So when all is said and done, lithium ion is now superior to lead acid for grid storage.
Exceptions exist when the simplicity of managing a lead acid battery comes into play. Lithium ion batteries need to be babied. Lead acid can be just thrown onto a DC power bus.
Just wondering: Is the environmental impact upon decommissioning a consideration? I'm not sure what important variables are involved in that.
"Lithium-ion has significantly higher cycle life than lead acid in deep discharge applications. The
disparity is further increased as ambient temperatures increase. The cycle life of each chemistry can
be increased by limiting the depth of discharge (DoD), discharge rate, and temperature, but lead acid
is generally much more sensitive to each of these factors."
"When determining what capacity of battery to use for a system, a critical consideration for lead acid is how long the system will take to discharge. The shorter the discharge period, the less capacity is available from the lead acid battery."
https://www.batterypoweronline.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/0...
"When determining what capacity of battery to use for a system, a critical consideration for lead acid is how long the system will take to discharge. The shorter the discharge period, the less capacity is available from the lead acid battery."
https://www.batterypoweronline.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/0...
I'm not sure I agree with that website, especially given that it is written by a company that only sells lithium batteries. Lead acid batteries, just like lithiums, can be configured many different ways. Where two batteries have the same physical dimensions, the lithium can be discharged more quickly. But at the same price point the much larger lead battery can pump out the same energy just as fast. "Discharge period" is a matter for vehicles, a use case where you want to maximize available power/weight. But on a grid it is reasonable to run batteries that never fully discharge, that never go below say 50% of their total capacity.
For me, the biggest selling point for lead acid remains that the technology is beyond IP issues. I am suspicious of any statement by manufacturers that tout proprietary tech over older publicly-available solutions.
For me, the biggest selling point for lead acid remains that the technology is beyond IP issues. I am suspicious of any statement by manufacturers that tout proprietary tech over older publicly-available solutions.
We could argue the technical merits, but with 100s of GWs of lithium battery storage manufacturing capacity coming online over the next 2-3 years, I'd say the market has spoken.
If you want to use lead acid (flooded or sealed) in your home battery shed for off grid or backup power, and you don't have an aggressive duty cycle, it's a fine solution.
If you want to use lead acid (flooded or sealed) in your home battery shed for off grid or backup power, and you don't have an aggressive duty cycle, it's a fine solution.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Solar + batteries is cheaper than natural gas? I knew it was beating coal, but natural gas? How recent is that?
Is LCOE the primary driver of power generation investment?
Is LCOE the primary driver of power generation investment?
Within the past few years, solar+batteries is starting to win bids against new natural gas generation in many common peak-related situations (not all yet, but increasingly so). The expectation is that solar+storage will win most peak-related bids by 2025 and then win most baseload bids by 2035.
https://www.woodmac.com/press-releases/batteries-renewables-...
After that, it will likely start to displace existing natural gas similar to what it's doing for coal now.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2018/12/03/plu...
https://www.woodmac.com/press-releases/batteries-renewables-...
After that, it will likely start to displace existing natural gas similar to what it's doing for coal now.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2018/12/03/plu...
You can draw a scenario. Natural gas has to be distributed, either as gas in pipes or as power down lines. Solar can, theoretically, be generated closer to source. Play with the geography enough and you can say that solar is the cheaper option.
Another common way to game the number is to compare the price of installed solar per watt using only generic land prices. A natural gas generator can be installed anywhere. A solar panel needs a southern view, preferably on a south-facing slope, to maximize exposure to direct sun. In my area (BC, Canada) our combination of higher latitudes and mountains mean that solar's land requirements are very specific/expensive in comparison to natural gas generators. Also weather.
Another common way to game the number is to compare the price of installed solar per watt using only generic land prices. A natural gas generator can be installed anywhere. A solar panel needs a southern view, preferably on a south-facing slope, to maximize exposure to direct sun. In my area (BC, Canada) our combination of higher latitudes and mountains mean that solar's land requirements are very specific/expensive in comparison to natural gas generators. Also weather.
* Storage-plus PPAs are already less expensive than the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for combined cycle natural gas in the United States, according to a recent report from Navigant Research. (My note: BIG DEAL, coal and natural gas [peakers and combined cycle gas turbine] will not be built)
* Lithium-ion batteries are one of the main drivers in the growth of the utility-scale energy storage market, accounting for almost 30% of non-pumped storage capacity developed since 2011, the report found.
* The report comes amid growing expectations that electric utilities increase their investment in storage-plus renewable energy projects as power purchase agreement (PPA) prices continue to fall and adoption expands.