Print 28 comment(s) - last by chris2618.. on Aug 14 at 3:53 PM

Wind and solar efforts are being held back by lack of grid storage

It may seem an old and tired criticism of renewable energy, but it's true -- the sun doesn't always shine and the wind doesn't always blow.  That's the challenge California is looking to tackle with a major grid storage effort.

I. California Grid Storage Dreaming

While often considered the "greenest" state, according to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) California actually is not a leader in renewable energy, despite being somewhat above average.  Last year about 25 percent of the state's energy came from renewable sources (by comparison South Dakota and Iowa were approximately 94 and 92 percent renewable sourced, respectively).

Still, California is the nation's most populous state, home to 1 in 8 Americans, so its green efforts are followed closely.

Renewables by state
California is in the dead middle -- 25th out of 50 states -- in renewable energy deployment, according to the DOE.

In July the renewable energy industry held its Intersolar conference in San Francisco, which claimed nearly 18,000 attendees and nearly 10,000 exhibitors.  A central theme among the conference's keynote speakers was the need for backup grid storage.

Grid storage is particularly important in the state, which typically only uses around 17 Gigawatts of power during the winter months, but sees peak power draw soar to 51 Gigawatts during the hot summer months as air conditioners roar alive.

Governor Jerry Brown remarked in a speech, "We can't just rely on sunlight.  We've got to bottle the sunlight."

California is aiming to have 1.3 Gigawatt-hours of grid storage by 2020.  To put that in context, that's the equivalent to about 79,000 of the 16.5 kilowatt-hour stacks found in the 2013 Chevy Volt from General Motors Comp. (GM) or roughly 15,500 metric tons of batteries at current densities for a battery plus the supporting cooling/charging systems.

California became the first state to pass a major grid storage effort, promising 1.3 GWh by 2020. [Image Source: Free HD Wallpapers]

The recently passed piece of legislation [AB 2514] anchoring that effort (approved by a 41-28 vote) is making a splash as it's the first major piece of grid storage legislation with teeth.  Lux Research analyst Steven Minnihan told Reuters that the bill will drive the market in grid storage from $200M USD in 2012 to an estimate $10.4B USD by 2017.  He says that other states may embrace similar measures between 2020 and 2030.  That's when the effects of the law will truly be felt, he argues.

II. Growing Pains

The bill and other similar state and federal drives to stoke artificial demand are controversial efforts, but it is a welcome handout to players in the struggling industry.  

So far grid storage has not proven commercially viable on the scale some had hoped.  The two biggest types of storage -- mechanical (flywheels) and chemicals (batteries) -- have both suffered from high profile bankruptcies.  In Nov. 2011 Beacon Power LLC -- a flywheel grid storage startup backed by DOE loans -- went bankrupt.  And then in Oct. 2012 A123 Systems (who lost its bid to supply GM's Volt) went belly-up.  Its automotive assets were bought by Johnson Controls Inc. (JCI), while a Chinese company (the Wanxiang Group) bought its remaining assets for $257M USD, including the grid storage unit.

Beacon Power
Post-bankruptcy, Beacon Power is coming back with new contracts.

Both companies have downsized and are looking slightly more competitive.  The Chinese-backed A123 Systems is back to selling grid storage, in June closing a major deal with Maui Electric Company, Ltd. to supply a fresh 1 Megawatt-hour (MWh) storage unit. 

Independent Bank Corp.'s (INDB) investment wing Rockland capitol, meanwhile scooped up Beacon Power for $30.5M USD, and scored a $5M USD state government contract to provide backup storage in Pennsylvania, breaking ground [PDF] on a new 20 MWh, 200 flywheel plant in Hazle Township, Penn. last December.  That plant is expected to be fully online next month.  Supposedly Rockland is also about to announce a new Beacon Power effort, which is not reliant on government aid, according to managing partner Scott Harlan.

These turnarounds are turning heads in the investment industry.  As the CEO of solar firm SunPower Corp. (SPWR), Tom Werner, said in a recent address, "We all agree, as we sit here today, storage is uneconomic.  But if you go out five years, I wouldn't bet against it."

Bill Gates, co-founder and former CEO of Microsoft, is investing big in grid storage.
[Image Source: Telegraph UK
Despite the failure of several prominent firms backed by government loans, venture capitalists seem particularly bullish on grid storage these days.  Aside from Rockland Capital and the Waxiang Group, other top investors in the field include Peter Thiel (cofounder of eBay, Inc. (EBAY) acquired PayPal), Vinod Khosla (co-founder of Sun Microsystems, an Oracle Corp. (ORCL) acquisition), and Bill Gates (co-founder of Microsoft Corp. (MSFT).  General Electric Comp. (GE) is also making deep investments in the field.

III. Fresh Ideas Drive Grid Storage Towards Cost Parity

Grid storage is a long play; a gas-fired backup power plant costs around $1,000 per kilowatt to build, while a battery plant is currently around 1.7 times as expensive.  But a mixture of exotic technologies and maturing established technologies have investors seeing green in years ahead.

One both literally and metaphorically hot startup is Ambri Inc., whose molten-metal battery technology was invented by a Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) professor.  After Bill Gates took Prof. Donald Sadoway's open courses, he funneled an undisclosed amount of funding into the firm.  Other backers include Total SA (EPA:FP) and Mr. Khosla.

Ambri Liquid Metal BatteryOne startup backed by Mr. Gates -- Ambri -- uses molten metal. [Image Source: D. Sadoway]

Other exotic battery formulations abound.  Japan's NGK Insulators Ltd. (TYO:5333) is marketing sodium-sulfur batteries, which scored a 4 MWh storage contract for Pacific Gas & Electric Corp.'s (PGE) San Jose grid region, with the help of a $3.3M USD state grant.  American Vanadium Corp. (CVE:AVC) -- a mining firm -- and Germany Gildemeister AG (ETR:GIL) have paired up to produce and sell vanadium redox batteries in the U.S. Vanadium has higher global production [source: 12] that lithium and may have longevity advantages over lithium batteries.  

GE meanwhile has a double play, offering both direct integration of a backup battery into a renewable energy-generating device, and a novel battery formulation.  Its "Durathon" battery is a sodium nickel chloride (salt+Ni) battery (developed by acquisition Beta R&D) formulation, and is integrated into its latest "Brilliant" turbines, such as the GE2.5-120 [PDF].  GE has been selling the turbines to California's wind-producing nexus -- Tehachapi

While novel battery formulations are gaining ground, the market's predominant technology -- lithium ion batteries -- is also seeing gains.  Tesla Motor Comp.'s (TSLA) refined thermal and charging system has been scaled to grid storage designs for CEO Elon Musk's other firm (well one of them, at least), SolarCity Corp. (SCTY).  The residential solar company began testing 8 kilowatt-hour home storage and business storage units in June.  

Tesla Elon Musk
Tesla Motor Company CEO Elon Musk is using his company's battery packs for solar grid storage. [Image Source: Reuters]

The technology is co-designed by Tesla's battery cell provider, veteran Japanese manufacturer Panasonic Corp. (TYO:6752) whom Mr. Musk owns a small stake in.  Like GE, SolarCity wants to eventually bundle Tesla/Panasonic's battery technology directly into its solar panels, and to release such a product by 2015.

Others -- following in Beacon Power's line -- are aiming to ditch batteries entirely, lofting mechanical storage schemes.

One prominent player is LightSail Energy, who scored a $1.7M USD contract from the California Energy Commission (CEC) to provide a demonstration scale unit of its exotic compressed air energy storage technology at the Ventura county naval base.  LightSail's backers include the oil company Total, Mr. Gates, Mr. Khosla, and Mr. Thiel.  It's vying with General Compression and SustainX -- for dominance of this young technology.  General Compression is notable for having raised over $100M USD in venture capital funding from prominent backers including Duke Energy and Conoco Philips (COP).

IV. Is it Worth It?

Not all are enthused, though, about the resurgence of grid storage.  They argue that it's still not cost effective and point to a deluge of new and old government grants, loans, and tax credits as propping the industry up and disguising the true cost.

Some of this criticism is even coming from bureaucrats -- including in California.  The Division of Ratepayer Advocates -- an industry advocacy under the umbrella of the California Public Utilities Commission (a state panel that regulates private power providers) has been drafting a critical evaluation of the push.

Farzad Ghazzagh, an analyst working on the unfinished study, says that the cost of the promised storage will likely range from $1B USD to $3B USD depending on the rate of technology advances -- or about $79 USD per Calif. taxpayer, at a maximum.  He comments, "The ratepayers would be on the hook."

Green Energy graveyard
Critics say gov't efforts are propping up an industry that's not ready for prime time.
[Image Source: Heritage]

A recent piece by conservative magazine Heritage comments:

Right now, families are forced into buying pricier electricity and taxpayers are on the hook if the project fails... Beyond the risk to American families for footing the bill for failed projects and the handout to companies for financially viable ones, loan guarantees have other negative impacts on the economy... The government’s intervention in the market decreases the incentive to innovate and increases the incentive to use the political process and lobby for handouts. Loan guarantees promote cronyism that rewards political connectedness over market viability.

Still, backup storage is on the verge of being cost-equal with fossil fuel backup power, if it can only push a bit lower.

Multinational utility The AES Corp. (AES) is promising 1 GWh of storage -- mostly with lithium ion batteries.  To the surprise of many it promised to reach that mark without government grants or loans.

If the storage sector can find a way to ease itself off government reliance, while continuing to reward loyal VC investors like Mr. Gates, Mr. Thiel, Mr. Khosla, and Mr. Musk, it just may make believers out of skeptics.  As alternative energy firms begin to incorporate a variety of storage technologies directly into their generating devices, grid storage may finally reach maturity after the frustrating string of newsmaking failures over the past few years.

Windmills at sunset
Green grid storage has its work cut out for it. [Image Source: Ames Power]

A mature grid storage industry is good news for the electronics and automotive sectors, as well.  By feeding off each other's mutual demand for reliable, high-density power storage, these three pillars of America's high-tech sector can collectively work to cut costs via the maturation of exciting new technologies.  But there's a lot of hard work ahead before that can happen, and a lot of bureaucratic wrangling that will surely provoke a lively debate.

Sources: AB 2514 [Grid Storage Bill], Paul Hastings [on AB 2514], Reuters

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By qshawn on 8/12/2013 3:11:02 PM , Rating: 2
We don't need to buy expensive batteries or design anything new. We can just repump water back up into the hydroelectric dams and store the potential energy. Nothing new.

RE: hydro
By invidious on 8/12/13, Rating: -1
RE: hydro
By toffty on 8/12/2013 3:45:38 PM , Rating: 3
Isn't ignorance wonderful Invidious? You have the entire internet with all the world’s information contained in it and yet you choose to be dumb. Bravo!

Here, I'll help you start the path to becoming knowledgeable:

RE: hydro
By qshawn on 8/12/2013 5:07:13 PM , Rating: 2
We're not talking about infinite power, just excess power.

RE: hydro
By mi1400 on 8/14/2013 2:50:11 AM , Rating: 2
"79,000 of the 16.5 kilowatt-hour stacks found in the 2013 Chevy Volt" ..... read the word Hour in it you stupid Journos .... those 79,000 Chevies will be able to hold the demand for 1 hour at full util.. just for 2 hours sustaining ... amp the num of chevies "TWICE" ...

RE: hydro
By toffty on 8/12/2013 3:41:34 PM , Rating: 2
I completely agree. Pumped Hydroelectric Storage just uses excess electricity and gravity to store power.

There are other solutions too like pumping air into underground tanks with excess electricity and when electricity is needed, release the air to spin the generator.

I would be interested to see how efficient the flywheels are though. While much more expense (I’m assuming) to build, they are much more compact to at least Pumped Hydroelectric Storage so in areas that are concerned about space, the flywheels are a good idea.

If the batteries that are being used to store power are old EV car batteries (should still have ~70% on them) this can work too. Making batteries JUST for this purpose is completely wasteful though since their average life span is just too short (10-15 years with new chemistries) at least until solid state batteries come to fruition

RE: hydro
By toffty on 8/12/2013 3:53:20 PM , Rating: 2
Thinking about this more I wonder if the flywheels/batteries are faster to react to changes in electrical needs. Meaning a two-step solution is needed. The first to react to a change in demand/surplus would be the flywheels/batteries with the slower hydroelectric pumps slowly converting from storage to production of electricity.

RE: hydro
By chris2618 on 8/12/2013 5:32:23 PM , Rating: 2
In the UK one of the pumped hydro station can come online in less 16 seconds.

RE: hydro
By MrPeteH on 8/13/2013 4:56:34 PM , Rating: 2
That's nice. So you'd be happy with 15 second power "glitches" whenever the wind fades?

Instantaneous replacement is necessary... or else we have to keep the traditional power plants running alongside the renewables.

That's why renewables are promising for the future, yet not particularly useful today as a replacement for traditional power.

RE: hydro
By Nagorak on 8/14/2013 7:35:29 AM , Rating: 3
The wind wouldn't instantaneously stop blowing either. I doubt you can fire up a NG power plant in less than 15 seconds either. Grid balancing is not managed in such a haphazard way.

There is some tolerance in how much power is in the electrical grid. A little too little or too much power doesn't immediately result in a power failure. It just means adjustments needs to be made before the discrepancy gets too large. A delay of 15 seconds should not be a serious issue in balancing the grid.

RE: hydro
By chris2618 on 8/14/2013 3:53:14 PM , Rating: 2
You really need to read up on grid management. First the demands on the grid are fully predictable. Secondly certain large customers sign up to system where by the power is interrupted for as long as half an hour without notice. This allows for any possible unforeseeable demand being managed.

RE: hydro
By Jaybus on 8/13/2013 3:34:26 PM , Rating: 2
Huh? Water falls as fast as anything else. The automated valves can be opened in seconds.

Pumped-storage hydro is a great choice where available. I know TVA's Raccoon Mountain plant near Chattanooga, TN is a 1.6 GW plant and has been operating since the 70's.

TVA uses Raccoon Mountain mostly to keep their nuclear plants at optimum output levels during off-peak hours and now also uses it to get the most out of their wind turbines.

Everyone agrees that pumped-storage hydro is the most cost effective and tried and true storage system. It is only the solar power promoters who want something else, as solar operates during the day (peak hours). PSH needs to do its pumping during the night. It is completely useless for storage of solar generated power, since it would be a net loss due to PSH only being around 70% efficient.

RE: hydro
By Reclaimer77 on 8/12/13, Rating: 0
RE: hydro
By qshawn on 8/12/2013 6:41:23 PM , Rating: 2
Yes I agree. The problem is that California is redesigning their energy grid around sporadic power generators. Big solar and winds plants are coming online with all the disadvantages (and advantages) that come with it. The last nuclear plant is closing, and there is little chance of getting more online.

RE: hydro
By Nagorak on 8/14/2013 7:31:25 AM , Rating: 2
Well go ahead and cry a river because nuclear power is basically dead. In addition to all of its severe flaws, such as nowhere to store the waste, and the risk of a plant melting down, which is no longer hypothetical in the aftermath of Fukushima, the simple fact is it is extremely expensive and not at all cost competitive.

Solar and wind are coming down in cost, and either are or will be competitive. Nuclear hasn't and never will be. Low priced natural gas from fracking everything will be the last straw for nuclear power.

And the world will be better off without it. The problems never could be worked out of nuclear, even with massive government subsidies and cutting corners on safety.

RE: hydro
By DanNeely on 8/12/2013 3:49:46 PM , Rating: 2
To do that on a non-trivial scale you either need to build a second smaller dam immediately below the first to store the water released during the generation phase; or have your hydro-power dam located along the coast and not care about having a salt-water reservoir. This mostly excludes using any existing dams without a lot more work than just building a giant set of pumps to lift water to the top of the dam; and the supply of fjords that could be flooded for the latter model is rather limited both in total and in not being where they'd be most useful.

Other than it's popcorn potential, greens currently being more interested in busting dams to improve fish migration than building new ones, I don't think this is practical on a large scale.

RE: hydro
By toffty on 8/12/2013 3:55:15 PM , Rating: 2
Most dams are poor candidates for Hydroelectric Storage.

Here's more information on what I think the OP is referring to:

RE: hydro
By Mint on 8/12/2013 4:20:43 PM , Rating: 2
Hydro storage only works economically if you're blessed with natural formations that give you a high altitude reservoir and a steep path to lower elevation, like New Zealand's Lake Pukaki: 518m above sea level, 69 sq miles, 1600 GWh by adusting the lake's water level by 14m.

I highly doubt California's hydro dams can be tapped any more than they already are for storage.

RE: hydro
By qshawn on 8/12/2013 5:22:02 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, natural formations would make it easier. So far California has 5 pumped storage dams already available with another 14 more proposed. Economically with efficiency of 85% it make more sense than any battery technology so far.

RE: hydro
By Mint on 8/12/2013 11:21:25 PM , Rating: 2
Absolutely. If batteries are on the margin of being competitive with gasoline for transportation (basically $0.35 per kWh of mechanical work), it doesn't have a prayer of being economical for grid storage where prices are an order of magnitude less.

RE: hydro
By Jeffk464 on 8/12/2013 6:13:44 PM , Rating: 2
California actually is not a leader in renewable energy

Also CA is buying a lot of the renewable electricity from other states.

RE: hydro
By Jeffk464 on 8/12/2013 6:17:27 PM , Rating: 2
We don't need to buy expensive batteries or design anything new. We can just repump water back up into the hydroelectric dams and store the potential energy. Nothing new.

Pretty sure CA already has one of these systems, I'm stretching my memory back to like 1985 though.

By SublimeSimplicity on 8/12/2013 3:06:54 PM , Rating: 2
I'm betting California has at lease 1.3GWh of battery storage driving around right now.

If they want to really address this, start working with Tesla, GM, and Nissan for their next gen cars to have vehicle to grid built into them. Then workout a pricing model that is mutually beneficial to drivers, business owners, and the utilities.

cost alignment
By DocScience on 8/12/2013 5:29:22 PM , Rating: 2
Wouldn't it be wonderful if those power providers (solar and wind) who are REQUIRING the use of massive and expensive storage foot the bill?

Great Scot
By crispbp04 on 8/12/2013 6:45:57 PM , Rating: 2
That's just enough giggawatts to power the flux capacitor! Time travel here we come!

To put it in context
By Solandri on 8/14/2013 5:26:13 AM , Rating: 2
California is aiming to have 1.3 Gigawatt-hours of grid storage by 2020. To put that in context, that's the equivalent to about 79,000 of the 16.5 kilowatt-hour stacks found in the 2013 Chevy Volt from General Motors Comp. (GM) or roughly 15,500 metric tons of batteries at current densities for a battery plus the supporting cooling/charging systems

Or to put it another way, California used 258,525 GWh of electricity in 2010 (it uses more than it produces).

That's 707.8 GWh each day, 29.49 GWh each hour. So 1.3 GWh represents enough electricity to power the state for 2 minutes 39 seconds.

By FITCamaro on 8/12/2013 8:29:07 PM , Rating: 1
How much will the American tax payer be fleeced for this like we were on Fisker, Solyndra, etc?

"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki