Monday , May 20 2019
Home / australia / Battery storage measurements showing Australia's lack of carbon removal policies

Battery storage measurements showing Australia's lack of carbon removal policies



Friendly printing, PDF and email
in haste? Here is the message.

Batteries and Solar not only compete with US advanced gas, but also compete with mid-combined cycle gas in two key conditions.

(1) You will calculate an arbitrage transaction as well as an ancillary income. These values ​​are included in both gas and BS combo. (I called the battery and the solar cell storage (BS) to get out in front of the deliberately disliked people.

(2) Batteries for which investment tax may be imposed [ITC] credit.

It is my interpretation after MBA students at Carnegie Mellon School of Management read a study.

Study sponsors are Fluence (utility scale battery technology provider). In terms of research quality, there are two black markers, a student and a sponsor with an agenda. Despite the black mark, this study seems to have proceeded cautiously and in my opinion the results are worth noting and that means that Australia has a meaningful value to consider.

Battery storage relative to combined cycle gas in the US

A white paper linked to Fluence by flueness data scientist Colleen Lueken can be found here BS v Gas White Paper

In Australia, resource analysts will think of platinum or cobalt credits in a nickel plant. This research uses modern statistics to "clust" a gas plant.

Gas plants are not based on technology, but are clustered on the basis of generation profiles. A 5/6 gas plant cluster requires a 6 hour BS plant and a cluster requires a 4 hour BS plant.

The first part of the data I found was to make sure that the battery cost was used. Fluence, of course, can not tell you the secrets that are more closely protected than the actual battery price and the passwords of teenagers, but the white paper shows footnotes.

"We spend $ 1,100 (kW) and $ 1,500 / kW for the four hour and six hour retention periods, which are commercial online dates in 2020, at cost of capital.

This price is about 387 KWh and 352 KWh, or if the battery capacity increases by 50%, the unit price drops by about 10%. This number is consistent with those who hit the industry by people like BNEF and Greentech, but they cite each other mostly.

A medium-sized gas plant is defined as having a capacity factor of less than 50%, equivalent to 270% or 62% of all US gas plants, and certainly includes most of Australia's gas plants.

US batteries are eligible for a solar investment tax credit. This allows 30% of the capital cost of the system to be deducted from federal US taxes. The tax credit for winds will be phased out by 10% by 2022.

It is worth about 26.1 $ / MWh from 30%. The picture below is for the Arizona BS plant. The assumed capacity factor of a gas plant cluster in Arizona is 32%. I apologize for the low resolution images.

The value of the store solar az "width =" 549 "height =" 282 "srcset =" https://reneweconomy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Picture1.png 900w, https: // reneweconomy. com.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Picture1-300x154.png 300w, https://reneweconomy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Picture1-895x462.png 895w "sizes = "(Maximum width: 549px) 100vw, 549px
Figure 1: The value of storage Arizona. Source: Carnegie Mellon / Fluence white paper

In this model, the battery (capital cost is 10%) has a long term marginal cost of US $ 45.61 MWh or 63 MWh A $. It is assumed that both the BS and the gas plant have a lifetime of 30 years. Of course we do not think the battery will last for 30 years. It may have some maintenance, in this case cell and inverter replacementcapex is allowed, but it is not mentioned explicitly.

On the other hand, you will not receive revenue credits for the leaking energy. Because we are still a long way from zero at the time of day

The BS power plant still does not fully match the battery capacity to the solar capacity factor. The following table shows the scaled median values ​​used by white paper analysts for Arizona plant calculations.

100 MW AC Solar and Battery Factory Scale USA "width =" 556 "height =" 97 "srcset =" https://reneweconomy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Screen-Shot-2019 - 04-23-at-12.00.23-pm.png 834w, https://reneweconomy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Screen-Shot-2019-04-23-at-12.00. 23-pm-300x53.png 300w "sizes =" (maximum width: 556px) 100vw, 556px
Figure 2: 100MW AC solar cell and battery factory sizing United States. Source: Carnegie Mellon / Fluence

31% Capacity Factor (AC) Assuming a daily output of about 744 MWh, you can produce surplus PV at any time of the day.

The US tax credit will be worth about $ 9 / MWh for both battery and solar, but there is nothing in Australia

Australia has achieved its renewable energy goals. This means that there is currently no policy support for renewable energy. There is no policy support for batteries or pumping hydro. There is no carbon cost. Nothing, Nothing, Nothing. Big Fat Zero. Donald Trump's US now offers more support than the federal government.

In South America and Victoria, there is subsidy-based state support for home battery storage systems. Perhaps you can argue that there is support in the form of cheaper finance in NSW, but QLD does not have to be bothered by CMFEU or ETU, but QLD has a token method.

Converting the Arizona LCOE to Queesnsland or Northern NSW will result in A $ 97 MWh (no ITC in Australia) using an equivalent 100 MW / AC solar and 68/408 MWh storage system. Again this assumes an important ancillary service revenue (frequency management and spinning preparation).

Before someone asked me how the battery would provide equivalent service, I did not know exactly what the spare spare was. However, I assume that it provides overall stability over the inverter and on the rise and fall of power. In this study, we pointed out that frequency regulation could be a competitive market in a hurry.

For battery storage systems, $ 97 / MWh can compete extensively with Australia's combined cycle gas plant, with a capacity factor of about 50% and GJ gas at $ 9.

I would like to point out that the traditional calorie calculation (GJ / MWh) of a combined cycle does not explicitly explain component efficiency or efficiency during lamp operation. Such conditions will not improve the rate of heat generation, but may or may not significantly degrade degradation. Gas plants can operate continuously, but we do not think we can get much value for an additional hour.

Paul Denholm of NREL, interviewed in the EnergyInsiders podcast earlier this year, also confirmed that batteries can perform well on peak shaving every day, as mentioned in the white paper.

For the past 12 months, the figures below were the highest of $ 148 MWh, $ 148 MWh, assuming an additional service FCAS revenue, which is likely to have dropped from $ 2 to $ 3 for 5-hour storage in NIS and $ 1 for 1GW in storage capacity. .

Of course, with the long-term policy support of the battery at the US level, this would be a better case, and certainly a relatively inexpensive carbon reduction.

Figure 3: Is it the last one? Source: NEM Review


Source link