Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Saturday February 29 2020, @10:46PM   Printer-friendly
from the electrifying-news dept.

Tesla "big battery" in Australia is becoming a bigger nightmare for fossil fuel power generators

Tesla's "big battery" utility-scale Powerpack system at the Hornsdale Power Reserve [(HPR)] in South Australia has yielded more than doubled[sic] the savings to consumers in 2019 than the year prior as it dominates fossil fuel generators on quicker demand response for the grid.

Hornsdale Power Reserve saved consumers AUD116 million ($75.78 million) in 2019, a big jump from AUD40 million ($26.14 million) savings in 2018.

The Hornsdale Power Reserve, owned and operated by French renewable energy producer Neoen, is home to the largest lithium-ion battery energy storage system in the world with a 100 MW/129 MWh. Tesla Powerpack [that] has been playing a significant role in grid stability since its installation in 2017, a function previously dominated by fossil fuel generators that bring energy prices high during system faults [or] planned maintenance.

"Hornsdale has just been the best asset for the state, and for us as well, it's a real success story," head of development at Neoen Australia Garth Heron said in an interview with RenewEconomy. We have shown that these kinds of systems can work. It saves consumers a lot of money, and it's something we should be rolling out right across the market."

[...]The HPR also announced plans to expand its capacity by 50%, boosting it by 50MW/64.5MWh. The project is expected to be completed in the first half of 2020 and will provide stabilizing inertia services critical to the shift to renewable energy in the region, and help push Australia closer to its goal of being net 100% renewable by 2030.

Previously:
Elon Musk: I Can Fix South Australia Power Network in 100 Days or It's Free
Tesla to Build 129 Megawatt-Hours Battery Storage System in Australia
Tesla Delivers on 100 MW Australian Battery Promise


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Booga1 on Sunday March 01 2020, @03:08AM (3 children)

    by Booga1 (6333) on Sunday March 01 2020, @03:08AM (#964747)

    Honestly, the cost savings is just a bonus to them. The proof of concept being functional was their main aim. I would say they've hit that target and then some.
    I expected it to turn out to be a wash on saving money at best. At worst, I expected some industrial fire that couldn't be put out. Though, I guess a lithium fire would still be better than the nuclear power plant accidents that happened.

    Then again, the battery doesn't make power at all. So I guess the real competitor is fast start electricity plants like natural gas. The battery is there to absorb the surge, not provide long term power.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Sunday March 01 2020, @06:08AM (1 child)

    by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Sunday March 01 2020, @06:08AM (#964793) Homepage
    Hydroeletric's pretty damn fast.

    Wile E Coyote pedalling mid-air is the only quicker source of energy.
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Sunday March 01 2020, @08:31AM

      by maxwell demon (1608) on Sunday March 01 2020, @08:31AM (#964835) Journal

      The problem with hydroelectric is that it is not available everywhere.

      Where it is, even the energy storage is a solved problem: If there's excess electricity from other power forms, use it to pump water up. When you later need that energy, run that water through the plant.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 02 2020, @02:16AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 02 2020, @02:16AM (#965206)

    Exactly, the batteries are there to stabilize electricity when wind, solar or a gas/coal central have a drop in it's own energy production. This give time to another gas/coal central push up it's production and return to the normal levels.

    Without it, coal/gas centrals would need to keep producing excess energy to try to cope with power fluctuations. Even with a excess power, a big variations like a coal central problem may voltage levels go outside usable parameters. Prices make huge price jumps at this time, so not only breaks stable electricity, but it is also very expensive problem.
    Batteries are great for this, energy maintain the correct levels and give time to restore productions levels in other centrals... batteries are also charged with solar or wind, when the price is low and avoid the price spikes.
    I suspect increasing the batteries capacity give even more time to choose the correct central to increase or request increase in several centrals and avoid going outside current productions range (and probably extra costs of going outside planed ranges)