with regard to storage, and companies’ duty to shareholders, I presume that the battery will be kept at an optimum charge level when not discharging.
What interests me is what is the source of charging power? While solar farms with BESS do not specifically say they use their own generation to keep them charged, the public would assume that to be the case. In winter, with very little solar generation and the need for the rapid response for peak lopping input to the grid being much higher, I would assume that grid power would charge these batteries with a corresponding increase in CCGT (gas) generation to meet this extra demand.
To get to the point, from the above, I am surmising that the reason companies build battery storage is pure money making rather than an actual requirement from a grid perspective assisted by government approval?
It's my understanding that batteries currently can make their money thru 'arbitrage'. I.e. they buy power when it's low-cost per MWh and sell when they can get high prices per MWh.
And they hence make more money for their shareholders by making as many such transactions as they can.
But some batteries are signed up (in the UK) to provide balancing services whereby they are contracted to keep a proportion of battery stored energy - maybe 20% - ready if called upon to support the grid. For which they get a fee. Except, I've seen reporting that some of those take the fees for providing the backup service but anyway go ahead and play their stored energy on the 'arbitrage' market. [One for the Regulator, methinks.]
Currently I'm fairly sure that energy stored is usually from the Grid, whatever shade of 'green' it might be at the time. Possibly a BESS co-located with a Solar or Wind farm will only charge from them, but I don't know how common that is.
Thanks for another insightful post. Why is it that government agencies can’t produce & publish this type of analysis?
I appreciate your concern that curtailing loads leads to deindustrialization, but would it not be pragmatic to consider limited demand management together with fill-in carbon based generation capacity as part of a transition strategy.
Would variable pricing of power not result in “voluntary” curtailment of demand? Of course relying on market forces does not necessarily result in the best outcome for society as a whole, which leads back to strategically identifying demand that can be curtailed…
To be clear, I think that 'solving' the problem of Shortfalls of power via Demand management would lead to further GB de-industrialisation. It is too easy a policy lever for DNZ to reach for when their 'plan' starts to fail. And I don't trust them not to keep pulling on that policy lever every time the Wind drops.
So, I exclude that option from the scenarios I explore to make sure I illustrate just how darned difficult it will be to 'decarbonise' only GB's power sector without destroying what remains of the GB productive sector.
As for variable power pricing: I think better-off people with EVs and Solar on their roofs plus maybe some home battery packs would make the most of it. People without those advantages, whose energy Demand is not flexible (because maybe they don't want to freeze in their homes), would probably suffer higher prices on average.
I'd also be surprised after several years of high electricity prices in the UK if there are many easy savings to be made across business. Plus factories / industries that have to operate 24/7 would also probably suffer higher prices, making them less competitive & more likely to go bust.
> As for variable power pricing: I think better-off people with EVs and Solar on their roofs plus maybe some home battery packs would make the most of it.
EVs and home battery packs yes, Solar, no. The price already goes down when the sun shines. This may change a bit now that heat pumps with an air cooling function (AKA ordinary air conditioners) will be allowed to get grants.
But everyone will benefit from variable pricing if it means we can keep the lights on without having to resort to fossil fuels for a larger percentage of the time, even it those people aren't on the variable price themselves.
Chris, your charts show that the UK has the potential to store 28MWh in Long Duration Electrical Storage (LDES). Academic papers that discuss dealing with extended wind lulls, aka Dunkelflautes, talk in terms of tens of TWh of storage, a million times the UK capacity set out in your charts
One paper looks across 36 years of wind data in Europe and the UK. It analysed a theoretical case of Germany without interconnectors with varying level of nuclear power. It concluded that whatever the level of nuclear power was installed there would always be a need for (very) Long Duration Electrical Storage that could discharge over weeks. The authors considered that only stored hydrogen was suitable for TWh of storage (I have read this in another papers as well).
Chris,
with regard to storage, and companies’ duty to shareholders, I presume that the battery will be kept at an optimum charge level when not discharging.
What interests me is what is the source of charging power? While solar farms with BESS do not specifically say they use their own generation to keep them charged, the public would assume that to be the case. In winter, with very little solar generation and the need for the rapid response for peak lopping input to the grid being much higher, I would assume that grid power would charge these batteries with a corresponding increase in CCGT (gas) generation to meet this extra demand.
To get to the point, from the above, I am surmising that the reason companies build battery storage is pure money making rather than an actual requirement from a grid perspective assisted by government approval?
Hi Iain, Thank you for your comments.
It's my understanding that batteries currently can make their money thru 'arbitrage'. I.e. they buy power when it's low-cost per MWh and sell when they can get high prices per MWh.
And they hence make more money for their shareholders by making as many such transactions as they can.
But some batteries are signed up (in the UK) to provide balancing services whereby they are contracted to keep a proportion of battery stored energy - maybe 20% - ready if called upon to support the grid. For which they get a fee. Except, I've seen reporting that some of those take the fees for providing the backup service but anyway go ahead and play their stored energy on the 'arbitrage' market. [One for the Regulator, methinks.]
Currently I'm fairly sure that energy stored is usually from the Grid, whatever shade of 'green' it might be at the time. Possibly a BESS co-located with a Solar or Wind farm will only charge from them, but I don't know how common that is.
Thanks for another insightful post. Why is it that government agencies can’t produce & publish this type of analysis?
I appreciate your concern that curtailing loads leads to deindustrialization, but would it not be pragmatic to consider limited demand management together with fill-in carbon based generation capacity as part of a transition strategy.
Would variable pricing of power not result in “voluntary” curtailment of demand? Of course relying on market forces does not necessarily result in the best outcome for society as a whole, which leads back to strategically identifying demand that can be curtailed…
Hi David, thank you.
To be clear, I think that 'solving' the problem of Shortfalls of power via Demand management would lead to further GB de-industrialisation. It is too easy a policy lever for DNZ to reach for when their 'plan' starts to fail. And I don't trust them not to keep pulling on that policy lever every time the Wind drops.
So, I exclude that option from the scenarios I explore to make sure I illustrate just how darned difficult it will be to 'decarbonise' only GB's power sector without destroying what remains of the GB productive sector.
As for variable power pricing: I think better-off people with EVs and Solar on their roofs plus maybe some home battery packs would make the most of it. People without those advantages, whose energy Demand is not flexible (because maybe they don't want to freeze in their homes), would probably suffer higher prices on average.
I'd also be surprised after several years of high electricity prices in the UK if there are many easy savings to be made across business. Plus factories / industries that have to operate 24/7 would also probably suffer higher prices, making them less competitive & more likely to go bust.
> As for variable power pricing: I think better-off people with EVs and Solar on their roofs plus maybe some home battery packs would make the most of it.
EVs and home battery packs yes, Solar, no. The price already goes down when the sun shines. This may change a bit now that heat pumps with an air cooling function (AKA ordinary air conditioners) will be allowed to get grants.
But everyone will benefit from variable pricing if it means we can keep the lights on without having to resort to fossil fuels for a larger percentage of the time, even it those people aren't on the variable price themselves.
Jamie,
are you not aware that it is fossil fuel generation that keeps the grid live?
We cannot do without it nor should we try.
Chris, your charts show that the UK has the potential to store 28MWh in Long Duration Electrical Storage (LDES). Academic papers that discuss dealing with extended wind lulls, aka Dunkelflautes, talk in terms of tens of TWh of storage, a million times the UK capacity set out in your charts
One paper looks across 36 years of wind data in Europe and the UK. It analysed a theoretical case of Germany without interconnectors with varying level of nuclear power. It concluded that whatever the level of nuclear power was installed there would always be a need for (very) Long Duration Electrical Storage that could discharge over weeks. The authors considered that only stored hydrogen was suitable for TWh of storage (I have read this in another papers as well).
The UK Clean Power 2030 Action Plan https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/clean-power-2030-action-plan/clean-power-2030-action-plan-a-new-era-of-clean-electricity-main-report mentions LDES but only in terms of GW of capacity. It is silent on the use of stored hydrogen. It is worrying that storage capacity is not mentioned in a strategic document.
I discuss Dunkelflautes and TWh storage in a brief document here: https://bit.ly/UKEA-Coping-with-the-Dunkelflaute. It contains a link to the academic paper.