6 ms·
Solar + Batteries/Storage are cheap to build today. No need to choose a worse technology in every way now, that only becomes less viable as time goes on.
by gibolt 5y ago
Solar + Batteries/Storage are cheap to build today. No need to choose a worse technology in every way now, that only becomes less viable as time goes on.
- bpfrh 5y agoGas based Power plants are for providing capacity quickly when needed, and the cost is good compared to lithium batteries: 1 KW Gas is 0,0639€ 1 KW Lithium Battery is ~105€ There is an incoming lithium shortage which means either the price will rise sharply, or you have to build other types of batteries.
- ben_w 5y agoThose are the wrong units in two different ways at once. KW = power, kWh = energy = integrated power over time Batteries are reusable. I see claims varying from 2,000, to more than 10,000 times. That reduces the battery cost to between €0.0525 and €0.0105 / kWh.
- bpfrh 5y agoYou are absolutely right, I somehow remembered it as the same. Isn't my comparison totally wrong on all levels? I compared batteries, which are storage(or "power plants") with the price of the thing the gas power plant uses. A better comparison would be the cost of battery storage, cost of filling it up, versus building a gas power plant and then producing the same energy. If I find a good article on that I will link it.
- iso1210 5y agoIf 1kWh of gas is 6 cents, and a 1kWh battery is $100 and lasts for 10,000 cycles, that puts the price of the battery at 1 cent/kWh plus the charging cost (2c/kWh for solar) In addition, for Europe, the key part of removing Russia from the energy equation is worth a hell of a lot of money.
- labawi 5y agoUnfortunately the math is meaningless if it takes 10 000 years to get those 10 000 cycles. Batteries are currently competitive for short response times and short cycles. As price declines they become become useful for longer cycles, but there will be a point beyond which we need alternative solutions, such as bulk storage/gas, long transmission lines, and/or demand management.
- ben_w 5y agoI expect most (but not all) of the batteries in a PV+battery grid would be cycled (to whatever depth) every day, giving them a ~27 year replacement cycle not too different from other power plants. In principle I prefer antipodal transmission lines for the grid and batteries for transport — grid is cheaper and a trade opportunity — but at global scale, such a grid will take a while to build.
- holoduke 5y agoI hate to say it. I am not pro Russia at all, but its mainly the US who wants Russia to be removed so they can sell their goods to Europe. There no other reason. Luckily we see a larger movement of people recognizing this annoying behaviour of the US.
- bpfrh 5y agoI can follow that, but isn't this problematic when there is a power needed when there is no wind/solar available for recharging and you still need more? e.g. we would need a much larger energy storage, than for gas?
- iso1210 5y agoGermany currently generates 50TWh per year of solar On average that's 136GWh per day, lets assume that was spread so that it's say 36GWh per day in winter and far more in summer. It consumes 500TWh a year. Lets assume consumption is 1,400GWh per day evenly across the year. Consumption is higher in the day, so even with shorter days in winter lets make that half during daylight and half at night, 700GWh each. If Germany increased its solar to 50 times as much as it currently has to generate 1800GWh a day in winter, it would require 700GWh of storage and a total of 1400GWh during the day. There are 48 million cars in Germany, lets assume that 65% of them are parked overnight and connected to the electric grid, making it 30 million cars. Make them all electric, with with about 30kWh of "flexible" capacity for draining overnight (50% capacity) and filling up in the day per car. That's about 1,000 GWh of storage available overnight, enough to provide for the entirety of German electric consumption overnight. During the summer when solar capacity would be three times as much, that excess capacity could be used to generate green hydrogen through electrolosis, used to do things like aluminium production, could be exported to neighbouring countries. Now sure switching cars to fully electric would increase total usage of energy, about 2,000 kWh per car per year, say 100 TWh a year extra, but then there's a lot of wind generation in Germany (>100TWh) now which would offset that.
- pyrale 5y agoBatteries have both kW (speed of charge/discharge) and kWh properties. For instance, Lazard's LCOS studies [1] list both values. It's not illogical to compare a battery with the production it's supposed to replace. [1]: https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-levelized-cost-of-storage-and-levelized-cost-of-hydrogen/ https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-...
- ben_w 5y agoIndeed, but mixing units means it isn’t a comparison.
- inglor_cz 5y ago"Batteries/Storage are cheap to build today" And yet the existing battery facilities that could keep a smallish region (or a single city) supplied for 15 minutes or more are exceedingly rare. Maybe they aren't as cheap as you claim. Australia is recently building a 1200 MW battery in New South Wales for 2.4 billion dollars - a cost comparable to a new nuclear reactor. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/feb/05/worlds-biggest-battery-with-1200mw-capacity-set-to-be-built-in-nsw-hunter-valley-australia https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/feb/05/world...
- deadfish 5y agoLooks like the cost of nuclear in Australia is not comparable. https://reneweconomy.com.au/too-slow-too-expensive-why-nuclear-power-makes-no-sense-for-australia/#:~:text=The%20cost%20of%20creating%20energy,creation%20is%20%2416%2C000%20per%20kilowatt https://reneweconomy.com.au/too-slow-too-expensive-why-nucle....
- berdario 5y agoI don't think we can trust these numbers https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/sites/default/files/resources/Public%20Affairs/2019/Nuclear%20generation%20prerequisites%20House%20of%20Reps%20Inquiry%20(Cth%2C%20September%202019).pdf https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/sites/default/files/re... "The spread of projected and reported capital costs is unsurprisingly broad. In Australia the most recent public assessment is provided by the GenCost2018 report by CSIRO and AEMO.10 It assumes the capital costs for SMR technology is $16,000/kW in 2020 (and experiences no major price decline over time). We note this number is more than double other cost estimates worldwide. We have sought additional clarification on the basis for this costing. Initial advice is that the number is based on a GHD estimate for AEMO of costs for a future Gen IV reactor to be constructed in 2035 and not for the type of reactor which would most likely be deployed in Australia." Anyhow, that 16k estimate is for power, not for energy... It's unclear over which timespans comparisons are being made (since a lot of it depends for how long power plants will be kept operational... A huge cost is the initial investment). I've seen energy estimates as low as 30$ per MWh, for Nuclear energy plants built with interest rates of 3%
- unicornmama 5y ago> Solar + Batteries/Storage are cheap to build today. That claim is baseless.
- Retric 5y agoSolar dropped below 2c/kWh in the kind of places you should actually install solar. It depends on interest rates but that’s shockingly low. Batteries provide peaking power cheaper than any rarely used peaking power plant. (2,000 charge cycles on a 100$/kWh battery charged from 2c/kWh solar is ~7c/kWh whenever you need it.) That’s all it takes for adoption to dramatically increase. Market forces will shift things around as ever more solar comes online, but as long as daytime rates are above nighttime rates solar is an obvious win for electric companies.
- algo_trader 5y ago> 2,000 charge cycles on a 100$/kWh battery charged from 2c/kWh solar is ~7c/kWh whenever you need it. Well - no. The $100 is up front capex. Add interest rate over 10 years and the price doubles. This is just the module/pack price, and you need to add installation, cabinets, fire suppression, AC/DC and controllers. Which probably add 50% to 100%. Like wise the headline 2c/kWh is probably for ideal projects with ideal land/transmission/regulation/geography. It is also 70% generated in summer, and only 30% in the winter months. Renewable energy is important, getting cheaper and accelerating and This-Is-Good (TM), But real physics and economics still matter.
- Retric 5y ago2000 cycles is 5.5 years at one cycle per day, though 2 cycles per day can also be useful at the cost of a very short lifespan. Even 5% interest rates above inflation only increase costs by around 14%. At scale batteries are effectively a fuel that needs continuous replacement, though related equipment can last much longer. Also, module/pack prices dominate installation and operating costs as PV operates on DC and therefore needs a DC/AC converter etc. Summer vs winter depends on geography, it’s largely meaningless between the Tropic of Cancer and Capricorn. It does become increasingly important further north, though offset by the relative need for AC. By the time you’re seeing such wide production swings from summer to winter you are simply in a bad location for solar. PS: Actual charge vs discharge cycles of course vary widely as to various other costs.
- belorn 5y agoSolar + a few hours of capacity are economical viable to run on a day and night cycle. Each day they charge up, and each day they discharge, with a market price that goes up and down in a similar pattern. This is possible for the southern part of EU, but more so in the southern parts of that (Egypt and below). Further north and solar get displaced by wind as the primary source of energy, and wind do not have a day cycle. It has weeks/months long period of low and high amount of wind. A battery solution that last hours is just a drop in the supply bucket. At the same time, rather than being discharge (and thus generating profits) each day, a wind battery solution will only generate profits a few times each year depending on how large the capacity is. The only way that will be profitable is if it several order times cheaper than the batteries for solar, or if the cost isn't directly linked to capacity. The technology that Germany and other "wind" countries is constantly talking about here is green hydro, but which is yet to be economical viable. One alternative is to build massive transmission lines from Africa and use solar power + batteries from the Sahara desert, through there are political, technological, and economical problems over designing such energy grid for EU. Thus for now the political winds are blowing towards natural gas and wind, despite the ecological issues of burning a fossil fuel.
- 7952 5y agoBattery storage is profitable if you can sell for more than you buy. It just needs to be connected to the grid and not necessarily connected to a particular generator. Although battery storage may still be located close to generation. One benefit of this is that you get more benefit from your grid connection. Without batteries you can just export for a part of the day. With batteries you can export when it is sunny/windy, export when it is dark/not windy, and even import energy when wholesale prices are cheap. The expensive grid connection is better utilised.
- holoduke 5y agoNot true. We have 10kw solar panels with 64x ,280ah LIFO batteries. Even in the winter we manage for 90% using only solar/battery power. We have a detached family house in the Netherlands using slightly above average. Our monthly bill is about 20 euros max. I build the entire setup myself for about 10k euros.