A BIG Battery stopped black out in SA

[solar pete]

Hi All,

I found this article interesting, when we dropped off the inter connector (national grid) again the other day a few big batteries saved the day, here is the article, https://www.solarchoice.net.au/blog/...nector-dramas/ Cheers

[Mike90250]

Awesome. thanks for the info. Really glad they worked instead of burning up.

[emartin00]

It hasn't taken long for most of the big utilities to realize the massive benefit of grid level storage. Large batteries are going in all over the country here in the US as a means to reduce the need for transmission updates, and to help prevent blackouts in remote areas.

[SunEagle]

Glad to see the battery system worked in SA. I expect more of those installations happening in the US but seriously doubt they will be nation wide. I

MO they are still too expensive to install compared to natural gas peaker unit that can run longer and provide more kWh.

A battery will work fine for short outages or quick dips in the grid but will be too costly to provide power for extended periods of time.

[Ampster]

Glad to see the battery system worked in SA. I expect more of those installations happening in the US but seriously doubt they will be nation wide. IMO they are still too expensive to install compared to natural gas peaker unit that can run longer and provide more kWh.

Maybe it has something to do with the cost of electrical power in California, but there hasn't been a peaker plant built in California in the past 5 years. Another factor is the cost to install a peaker is more expensive because of air quality regulations.

I agree, economics will drive deployment. One thing that has happened is that more combined cycle plants have been built here to replace older steam plants. They are more efficient than the older steam plants and ramp up quicker. That has helped the economics of batteries because the batteries don't have to provide longer duration support since the combined cycle plants can ramp quicker.
I understand, California is not Florida but I do think it is a trend worth noting.

[SunEagle]

Maybe it has something to do with the cost of electrical power in California, but there hasn't been a peaker plant built in California in the past 5 years. Another factor is the cost to install a peaker is more expensive because of air quality regulations.

I agree, economics will drive deployment. One thing that has happened is that more combined cycle plants have been built here to replace older steam plants. They are more efficient than the older steam plants and ramp up quicker. That has helped the economics of batteries because the batteries don't have to provide longer duration support since the combined cycle plants can ramp quicker.
I understand, California is not Florida but I do think it is a trend worth noting.

I agree that energy storage is probably cheaper in CA then other areas of the US. As for batteries becoming more common around the country... based on the work I do the cost of electricity is so low in most places it is even hard to justify replacing 20 year old transformers that have very low efficiencies compared what is now mandated by the DOE.

I also think the labor costs and air quality regulations put some equipment installations way past what they should be in $$. But I agree that keeping the air clean and people employed is very important to me. How that is done is also a mystery to me for some locations.

My biggest fear is that if we become dependent on short term power solutions provided by batteries we will be in the dark should a natural event take the grid down more than a few days.

Batteries will never provide the power people normally consume each day unless we drastically shed our daily loads.

[solar pete]

I think batteries just have to be part of the mix of technologies going forward. I really think we dropped the ball here in SA originally when there were subsidies around for large scale wind and solar, lots of large scale wind and solar got installed here, had we mandated at the time that all large scale wind and solar were only eligible for the subsidies if they also had a battery, that would have made our grid more stable than it is now.

That being said the 3 big battery's we now have have already proved their worth. We have a subsidy on residential batteries now in SA and that has seen thousands of small batteries like the Power Wall and LG chem being installed here over the last year or so that will also help to stabilize the grid. We regularly have periods throughout daylight hours here where we are 100% running from wind, solar and batteries but we also have the most expensive cost of electricity in the western world next to Hawaii, without that high price we would not have seen the developments that we have seen, weird huh, cheers

[Ampster]

............ We regularly have periods throughout daylight hours here where we are 100% running from wind, solar and batteries but we also have the most expensive cost of electricity in the western world next to Hawaii, without that high price we would not have seen the developments that we have seen, weird huh, cheers

We are not far behind those costs in California. Sometimes necessity is the mother of invention.

[J.P.M.]

I think batteries just have to be part of the mix of technologies going forward. I really think we dropped the ball here in SA originally when there were subsidies around for large scale wind and solar, lots of large scale wind and solar got installed here, had we mandated at the time that all large scale wind and solar were only eligible for the subsidies if they also had a battery, that would have made our grid more stable than it is now.

That being said the 3 big battery's we now have have already proved their worth. We have a subsidy on residential batteries now in SA and that has seen thousands of small batteries like the Power Wall and LG chem being installed here over the last year or so that will also help to stabilize the grid. We regularly have periods throughout daylight hours here where we are 100% running from wind, solar and batteries but we also have the most expensive cost of electricity in the western world next to Hawaii, without that high price we would not have seen the developments that we have seen, weird huh, cheers

On the prior large scale alternate energy projects not having storage: Maybe the tech was not developed or cost effective enough at that time. Things seem to be moving rather quickly on those fronts.
On the thousands of small, distributed battery systems: At the least, they probably won't make the grid less stable. Other benefits : The higher the cost of a commodity, the easier it is for the more expensive alternates such as distributed generation and storage to become cost competitive, and the more efforts will be made to improve the alternates in pricing and quality to the expensive commodity.

As the technology to grid alternates/adjuncts improves, there is pressure on the cost of grid electricity to come down or at least toward a slower rate of increase, and the cost of grid power and the cost of any alternate supplied power will tend toward equality. The rub there is agreeing on what those actual costs might be and how they might be calculated on an equal footing so that users can make valid comparisons.

In the mean time, alternate energy mfgs. suppliers and vendors love high POCO prices.

Thought experiment: Consider where alternate energy would be today if POCO power were 10% of the cost it is now.

[Ampster]

.....At the least, they probably won't make the grid less stable. Other benefits : The higher the cost of a commodity, the easier it is for the more expensive alternates such as distributed generation and storage to become cost competitive, and the more efforts will be made to improve the alternates in pricing and quality to the expensive commodity.

Yes, I have seen some studies that have suggested that distributed generation can contribute to grid stabilty.

As the technology to grid alternates/adjuncts improves, there is pressure on the cost of grid electricity to come down or at least toward a slower rate of increase, and the cost of grid power and the cost of any alternate supplied power will tend toward equality. The rub there is agreeing on what those actual costs might be and how they might be calculated on an equal footing so that users can make valid comparisons.

The costs of generation may come down but the cost of transmission and distribution also has to be accounted for. That is especially difficult as those costs tend to be fixed. There are also capital investments required for the costs to upgrade the information systems so they can run the grid bidirectionally as distributed generation becomes more prevalent.

[Ampster]

Here is an industry forecast for the US.
https://www.utilitydive.com/news/ene...oodmac/573973/
The forecast includes a Florida Power & Light facility scheduled to open in 2021

[J.P.M.]

The costs of generation may come down but the cost of transmission and distribution also has to be accounted for. That is especially difficult as those costs tend to be fixed. There are also capital investments required for the costs to upgrade the information systems so they can run the grid bidirectionally as distributed generation becomes more prevalent.

I appreciate what you write. Some, maybe even most costs POCO's incur are fixed.

But if user owned distributed generation costs to generate electricity come down with a corresponding (perceived ) decrease in the per kWh cost of that user generated electricity, the per kWh POCO prices the residential owners of distributed generation pay to the POCO for that POCO delivered power will need to drop or the POCO will lose business.

The POCOs will have a Hobson's choice. The POCO will either lower the price of their product or not sell it to such users, or at least not as much of it.

One of a lot of driving inputs for the regression toward some price equality between POCO product and user generated electricity might possibly take the form of the POCO lowering prices as much as possible, and if distributed (end user) generation and storage costs could get low enough to result in a per kWh price of that generation that could be theoretically much lower than the cost of POCO power - it (the cost of the distributed/user owned equipment) won't - because doing so would mean mfgs. of the distributed (user) generation equipment would be leaving money on the table by doing so.

What might happen is the alternate sources of user generated power get priced not as low as they could be priced, but only low enough to result in a (perceived) per kWh price that's only slightly lower than that of the POCO power. That's a form of what I once learned and lived with "selling to the market".

Grossly oversimplified example: If I have a new way to meet a ubiquitous user perceived need that I can bring to market in such a way and for such a low cost (to me) that it could reduce a user's cost to 10% of the old way while I still make a reasonable profit, why would I leave money on the table and sell my product for a price that reduces the end user's costs by 90% ?

If I priced my product such that the end user saved, say, 10 % over the other methods of meeting the need, the end user would benefit (or more important from a marketing standpoint perceive a benefit), but I'd make a larger profit than if I only sold the product at a much lower price and garnered "only" a reasonable profit. By selling to the market, that is, at a price that is such that the customer sees a benefit, but is ignorant of how he's still taking it in the shorts, those on the supply side make a higher profit/money.

For this situation of POCO vs. dropping distributed generation costs, the cost of the distributed generation electricity - the life cycle cost of the distributed generation equipment expressed as a per kWh price - would be priced (slightly) lower than the competition, but not low enough to put the POCO out of business. That way, the equipment mfgs., sellers and installer will also be able to leverage some (self) interest in keeping the POCO and their high cost product around as the high tide that floats their boat.

That little and simplistic example is one of several reasons why I was one of a lot of people who suggested more than a few years ago that POCOs get into the PV mfg. and perhaps installation business, and lease distributed generation to residential users. They, of course, passed.

Now, and back to the POCOs and their storage efforts, they have the same or at least what looks like a similar opportunity to get out in front of the developing market for residential energy storage, but that door seems to be closing rather quickly, and they're again standing around with little more than their best intentions in their hands.

[Ampster]

..........

Now, and back to the POCOs and their storage efforts, they have the same or at least what looks like a similar opportunity to get out in front of the developing market for residential energy storage, but that door seems to be closing rather quickly, and they're again standing around with little more than their best intentions in their hands.

My comments are limited to the deregulated California market for electricity because that is the one I am familiar with. Also these comments only apply to the three regulated Investor Owned Utilities and not to the various municipal utilities or irrigation districts. Since California is the fifth largest economy in the world, what happens here may have some relevance globally.

Behind the meter storage only requires a building permit so there is nothing the IOUs can do to regulate the growth of residential storage. I suppose if they made their grid more resiliant there would be fewer people standing in line to buy generators. However residential storage also has paybacks in terms of load shifting so I am not sure i could imagine a pricing model that would change those economics.

NEM 3.0 threatens to make standalone solar less attractive but coupling it with storage might be able change the economics. For new construction since solar is more or less required, maybe builders will offer storage as an upgrade.

I would not like to be in the shoes of a senior executive of any of the IOUs in California. I did see a friend recently who was president of SCE in the 80's and he didn't have a clue. I honestly haven't given much thought to what they can do to improve their situation. . My efforts have been focused on what they might do and how I can hedge that risk to reduce my cost structure. Long term I am grand fathered into a great EV rate and have 18 years left on my NEM 2.0 tarriff.

[SunEagle]

Here is an industry forecast for the US.
https://www.utilitydive.com/news/ene...oodmac/573973/
The forecast includes a Florida Power & Light facility scheduled to open in 2021

Fine. You are right and I am wrong. Just have some candles ready when the lights go out after the batteries die.

[Ampster]

Fine. You are right and I am wrong. .....

It is just news. Thought you would be interested. No competition intended.