This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

The future of energy generation and storage

Jump to new
The push for V2G storage is increasing, especially in countries that are land poor.

Nobel winner suggests letting EVs power the grid to go green

Rising adoption of battery-powered transport and the further development of vehicle-to-grid, or V2G, systems -- which allow the two-way flow of electricity -- could offer a potentially better option to store renewable energy.
www.mining.com
From the article:
Japan is among countries testing out the capabilities of the technology, and more than half of current global pilots involve Nissan Motor Corp.’s Leaf cars, among the few major models that currently offer two-way charging.
Rising adoption of battery-powered transport and the further development of vehicle-to-grid, or V2G, systems — which allow the two-way flow of electricity — could offer a potentially better option to store renewable energy than expensive, dedicated battery facilities, Akira Yoshino said in an interview.

Japan, which has been criticized over the slow pace of its transition away from fossil fuels, is constrained by limited space for solar power, onshore wind farms and battery storage hubs. Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s government is seeking to cut greenhouse emissions by 46% from 2013 levels by 2030.

“If EVs becomes widely used, Japan will definitely go in that direction,” Yoshino said. The 73 year-old Japanese scientist was awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2019 together with two others for work on development of the modern lithium-ion battery.

Japan should be able to tap a meaningful amount of power storage capacity when the country’s EV fleet reaches 5 million, he said. The country’s EV adoption is lagging behind other nations and annual sales won’t exceed 200,000 before 2025, BNEF said in a sector outlook in June.

Elsewhere, startups such as Form Energy Inc. are working on improvements that aim to dramatically lower the costs of dedicated, long duration battery storage systems.

Grid-scale hubs are being deployed in increasing numbers, led by projects in California, Australia and China. France-based Neoen SA last week brought a new 300 megawatt capacity facility into operation near Geelong in southeastern Australia.
 
As I said many posts back, V2G could have negated the need for Snowy2, but it's too late now and we are a laggard anyway:

So many missed opportunities last year when hundreds of billions was paid out unproductively to employ people not to work.
 
rederob said:
As I said many posts back, V2G could have negated the need for Snowy2, but it's too late now and we are a laggard anyway:


So many missed opportunities last year when hundreds of billions was paid out unproductively to employ people not to work.
Click to expand...
Never, ever give up. ?
 
The facts are starting to sink in, that the transition to renewables is well underway and is definitely happening faster than anyone expected. Well worth a read for those who are interested in the progress being made.

Brown coal likely to close by 2032, AEMO says, but all coal may be gone by then

Step change has become AEMO’s core scenario to manage the grid, and it assumes a threefold increase in coal retirements by 2030.
reneweconomy.com.au
From the article:
Australia’s electricity transition is accelerating at an unprecedented pace, and the new planning blueprint from the Australian Energy Market Operator now assumes that coal closures will occur at three times the expected rate, and all the country’s brown coal generators could be gone by 2032.

The new assumptions are made in AEMO’s updated “Step Change” scenario, which was the “out-there” scenario in the first edition of its Integrated System Plan in 2020, but is now considered to be the most likely outcome in the 2022 edition and will be the new “core” or central scenario for planning purposes.

The Step Change scenario assumes that 14GW of coal capacity will retire by 2030, because the generators are finding it increasingly difficult to compete against rooftop solar and large scale renewables, and because they are getting older and more costly to maintain.

That is nearly three times the 5GW of retirements that are currently scheduled. In its place, the amount of wind and solar needs to treble by 2030, rooftop solar will double, and the draft ISP lays out a plan of how to get there, with a particular emphasis on new transmission and storage.
The draft 2022 ISP is a breath-taking document because it highlights the breadth and speed of the transition that is taking place, and the scale and urgency of what needs to be done to ensure it continues. But the document will also be highly influential on government, regulator and investor thinking.

The remarkable and – for those concerned about climate change – uplifting aspect of the draft ISP is that the coal exit could be even more dramatic. For the first time, AEMO has also introduced a scenario compatible with the 1.5°C Paris climate goal, and the results are – to use its own description – monumental.
The modelling for “Hydrogen Superpower” suggests all the coal generators in Australia’s main grid could be closed by 2032, from which time it will be largely powered by wind, solar and vast amounts of storage.
“Australia’s National Electricity Market (NEM) is supporting a once-in-a-century transformation in the way society considers and consumes energy,” the document says.

“(It is) drawing on electricity in place of much of the oil and gas for industry and homes, replacing legacy assets with low-cost renewables, adding batteries and other new forms of firming capacity, and reconfiguring the grid to support two-way energy flow to new power sources in new locations.

“It is doing so at world-leading pace, while continuing to provide reliable, secure and affordable electricity to consumers.”


AEMO’s Step Change scenario, developed after 18 months of detailed consultation with more than 200 energy experts, assumes a 79 per cent share for renewables by 2030.

More than half of the experts consider this to be the “most likely” scenario, which means that AEMO – and other institutions such as the Australian Energy Regulator, when ruling on funding applications for new poles and wires – will base their decisions around it.

But the hydrogen superpower cannot be ruled out. Transmission companies such as Transgrid have already produced scenarios showing that more than 90 per cent renewables is possible by 2030, which is somewhere between Step Change and Hydrogen Superpower.

As AEMO writes, the scale of development in this Hydrogen Superpower scenario “can only be described as monumental.”

It would require Australia to become a renewable energy superpower with an additional 256GW of wind and approximately 300GW of solar – 37 times its current capacity of VRE (variable renewable energy).

For now, however, AEMO is settling on Step Change as its core planning scenario, and has outlined its “Optimal Development Plan” (ODP), to deal with the likely early coal closures. Most notably, this suggests quick and early work on important new links such as Hume and VNI west in Victoria.

“The Step Change scenario forecasts a rapid transformation in Australia’s National Electricity Market, consisting of a significant investment in renewable generation, storage and firming generation as coal plants exit, and improvements to transmission,” AEMO CEO Daniel Westerman says.
“In this scenario, the NEM will operate without coal generation by 2043. This requires a substantial increase in battery and pumped-hydro storage, hydrogen or gas-fired generation for peak demand, all complemented by a market that incentivises energy users to adjust demand based on system conditions.
“This transformation will efficiently deliver secure, reliable and affordable electricity while substantially contributing to national emissions objectives,” he said.
And it will deliver $29 billion in net market benefits, returning 2.5 times the investment value. AEMO doesn’t specify the potential savings for individual households, but they are likely to be substantial.
The draft ISP doesn’t hold out much hope for those touting a “gas-led” recovery. Yes, gas will play a role, and around 9GW of gas generation may well be needed. But these will be limited to fast-start generators that will be rarely used. There won’t be much of a role for “mid-merit” or intermediate gas generators.
Most of the “dispatchable” generation will come in various forms of storage, with about 45GW/620 GWh of dispatchable storage capacity, 7GW of existing dispatchable hydro and the 9GW of gas-fired generation. That is in the “step change” plan.
The scale of what is required in each state is phenomenal, particularly as in the Step Change scenario the amount of electricity produced in the main grid is doubled to meet the demands of electric vehicles, the electrification of industry and households, and renewable hydrogen.
NSW will require 38GW of new wind and solar by 2050, and it already has a plan to build 12GW by 2030. Queensland will require even more, 47GW of new wind and solar by 2050, South Australia would built an extra 15GW (six times its current capacity), and Victoria 23GW.
Tasmania is expected to add 2.5W, although AEMO doesn’t assume any offshore wind farms, such as the 1GW Alinta project proposed for the Portland smelter, because these are at such early stages.
Households will play a critical role, not just in the uptake of electric appliances and kicking gas out of the home, but also through the purchase of EVs and a five-fold increase in rooftop solar PV capacity to more than 75GW by 2050, and their participation in “virtual power plants” and demand response.
To make sure the grid is ready to support this extraordinary transition, AEMO has proposed a 30-year ‘optimal development path’ which focuses on the 10,000 kilometres of new transmission that will be needed.
Some are already underway, but AEMO is also anxious that serious work commences on other projects such as VNI West in Victoria, the Hume link from Snowy, and the Marinus links from Tasmania. It also talks of the importance of social licence.
“The land needed for major VRE, storage and transmission projects to realise these goals is unprecedented,” the document notes.
“Early community engagement will be needed to ensure investments have an appropriate social licence. The new REZ Design Report framework is a start, but proactive engagement and integrated land-use planning is also needed at a jurisdictional level.”
https://reneweconomy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/AEMOisp2022fig27.jpg
And if those new transmission lines face insurmountable hurdles?

“In some cases, this may lead to alternative developments that reduce the need for new transmission, including batteries, gas-fired generation and offshore wind developments that connect to the existing network easements.”
 
rederob said:
As I said many posts back, V2G could have negated the need for Snowy2
Click to expand...

There's still time for it to negate what's needed next if it's really up to the job.

There's plenty of gas-fired capacity, additional to existing hydro and Snowy 2.0, required to be built as per the 2022 Draft Integrated System Plan recently released by AEMO.

Gas at 9GW versus Snowy 2.0 at 2.04 GW.

That's new gas-fired generation to be built as well as some which already exists so plenty of opportunity still there if something else can actually do it better.

How much energy can actually be drawn out of an EV fleet over a period of days is a question in itself of course. For example a fairly typical 6 day wind + solar (collectively) drought.

If we assume that EV's are on average 90% charged at the start of it, and bearing in mind that they'll still be used as cars during that period, how much energy can actually be taken from them?

The answer to that of course depends very heavily on how large the EV batteries actually end up being for mass market cars that people actually do end up buying.

That said, for a theoretical example:

EV battery capacity 85 kWh

EV uses 0.166 kWh per km.

90% charged at the start and assuming consumers won't allow it to discharge to the grid below 25%.

6 days VRE drought, eg as actually occurred 5 - 10 July this year, average car travels about 220km so that's 37 kWh.

90% at the start = 76.5 kWh

25% minimum = 21 kWh

Usable storage between those extremes = 55.5 kWh - 37 kWh used to move the car = 18.5 kWh per car available for net discharge over 6 days.

On that basis it would need 19 million EV's to match Snowy 2.0's bulk energy storage capability.

Bearing in mind that Snowy 2.0 isn't the end of it by any means - there's that 9GW of gas-fired generation, some of which already exists but much of which needs building either as new or replacement capacity. Plenty of opportunity there for any alternative....

 
I support hydro schemes in general and pumped hydro fit for purpose.
Your numbers make a compelling case. However I saw V2G as a stop gap in the greater scheme of our energy transition and not as a replacement for capacity build.
Our VRE network is fragmented and in its early days, so aside from inadequate capacity we don't have HVDC connectivity as we would need it and are still years away from getting any scale into DERs should pilot programs prove themselves. Everyone in the VRE sector also knows that without storage the problem of intermittency is not solved. In that regard the world's biggest oil producer does deals like this, so the future of energy generation and storage gets clearer.
 
In response to another thread which mentioned nuclear power but going into the detail of it was getting a bit off topic in my view:

If we were to hypothetically replace coal (but not gas or anything else, just coal) in NSW with nuclear then applying UK costs for new nuclear currently under construction (Hinkley Point C) that comes to:

Capital employed = Approximately $130 billion AUD (based on UK costs at the present exchange rate)

Income from the sale of electricity $4.2 billion per annum (based on past 12 months actual market prices in NSW)

Total revenue = $9.7 billion per annum (based on UK contracts between the developer / owner and government)

Required government contribution = $5.5 billion per annum to bridge the gap between total revenue and the selling price of electricity produced. Plus insurance provided at no charge.

So perhaps my use of the term socialism to describe it isn't correct but nonetheless, it's an industry where the cost is substantially socialised. Taxpayers, not the sale of a product, are providing over half the total revenue and also covering the cost of insurance.

So any decision which leads to nuclear being the source of energy used in a country is a decision made by governments not business. Business might come up with specific detailed proposals but it's government that decides to do it in the first place.

Exception of anywhere that actually can do it profitably but even there, it'll still be subject to rigorous government approvals and monitoring even if it does stack up financially.

Unless the economics improve, or someone thinks they can do it drastically cheaper in Australia than is actually being done in the UK, then there won't be any enthusiasm for nuclear unless government decides to do it.
 
I think the issue is not whether the UK or any other country wants a nuclear power station or what the cost is, but more about what options are available to meet the dual purpose of a safe and secure electrical system and zero emissions.
Everyone wants zero emissions and electricity to be reliable and affordable. To do that a pragmatic and realistic approach has to be taken, emotion and wishing upon a star isn't really a sensible approach for a government to take.
Hinkley Point is only the first of the power stations the U.K needs to replace or compliment the 10 or so nuclear stations they already have.

The cost factor involved with nuclear stations, is trying to be addressed with the development of SMR's, there is a huge amount of money being poured into their development and there is no reason to believe that they won't be successful as with other technologies like batteries etc.

People go on about batteries will get cheaper, they will improve energy densities due to technological advances, the problem is the same people think the only fields that will advance are those which align with their beliefs.

US company in talks to build nuclear power plant near Holyhead

New plants are needed to hit Britain’s zero-carbon targets
www.thetimes.co.uk

China advances in nuclear power with world's first small modular nuclear reactor

China is now home to the world's first small modular nuclear reactor. The Huaneng Group Co.’s 200-megawatt unit 1 reactor at Shidao Bay provides power to the grid in Shandong province. The reactor can use nuclear energy for various functions including power generation. It can also be used in...
www.wionews.com
 
Last edited:
Of course we have to remember that for some countries nuclear reactors also produce nuclear weapons fuel, so emissions and ROI does not enter in to the equation a s much as for those countries that don't have nuclear weapons.
 
Some excellent news for creating a renewable energy electricity network.


Big win for virtual power plants as AEMO backs off on metering changes​


Giles Parkinson 23 December 2021 0
Share
Tweet
0Share


Proponents of virtual power plants – the systems that link potentially thousands of distributed devices such as rooftop solar, battery storage and electric vehicles – have won a major victory after proposed changes to metering rules were dumped in the face of a volley of protests.

Earlier this year, Australian energy companies and new technology providers warned that new proposals from the Australian Energy Market Operator could effectively kill the market for “virtual power plants”, considered critical for smoothing the transition towards a 100 per cent renewables grid.

Big win for virtual power plants as AEMO backs off on metering changes

Big win for virtual power plants – including rooftop solar, batteries and EVs – as AEMO adjusts proposed changes to metering speeds.
reneweconomy.com.au
 

Of course, the breakthrough in electric motors will be super-conductors, if they ever happen.
 

The nuclear lobby keeps sticking its head up but imo they have to improve their technology to compete with other renewables without massive subsidies. The downside risk of handling nuclear materials is too great compared with the benefits imo.

Unless nuclear fusion happens of course , oh it already does, on the sun.
 
You are spot on, IMO unless SMR's are perfected, nuclear will never become widespread and will only be used in areas where alternatives aren't feasibleable.
But as with E.V's, vaccines and every other technology, if there is a requirement that something is developed, the money required to develop it will be found.
 
SirRumpole said:
Yes, my power bills are cheaper. I can remember getting a bill for $1500 one quarter some 10 years ago, it usually averages about $600 now, which I reckon is still too high, but an improvement.
Click to expand...
Rubbish! Only the loons besting the drum for the renewables keen dribbling that crap!

Everyone’s power bills are sky rocketing! Not only here across the US and Europe!
Including several black outs! Thx to the useless renewables and still not being able to keep up

irony is they aren’t even green and are toxic for the environment
 

Have a look at the price of gas and coal.

Gas is at several times the "normal" price, to the point that it's now completely uneconomic as a power generation fuel, and coal's also at all time highs.

Between them that's a huge part of what's putting upward pressure on costs.

Plus there's the problem of the inherently inefficient structure of the industry brought about by the various politically inspired "reforms" which saw a loss of scale of economy and the emergence of countless middlemen and bureaucracies whom now account for a substantial portion of total costs to the average consumer. That's a political decision independent of the generation technology.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Gen Alpha
Replies
13
Views
714
moXJO
M
Electricity investments
Replies
8
Views
469
Smurf1976
SS1 - Sun Silver
2
Replies
27
Views
5K
Sean K
PGTX - Platinum Global Transition Fund
Replies
1
Views
615
Dona Ferentes
ASK - Abacus Storage King
2
Replies
20
Views
3K
finicky
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...