Solar ... In the news

Coastalwatch

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Flippin eck, solar and storage contracted in the US at 3.3c/kWh.

LA & 8Minute Solar Ink Lowest Cost Solar-Plus-Storage Deal In US History

An update to this post. Seems it's not all oil, gas and coal across the pond!

Even in progressive California, Los Angeles stands out with its bold plans to decarbonise its power sector. The city’s municipal utility, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP), is the United States’ largest publicly owned utility. LADWP is fully embracing energy storage as a critical tool for achieving the city’s clean and affordable energy goals.

LADWP is already very familiar with the benefits of energy storage. It operates a 20MW lithium-ion battery storage system at its Beacon Solar Plant as well as a 1,500MW pumped hydro facility at Lake Castaic. In February 2019, LADWP announced it will not be replacing three gas-fired power plants scheduled to close by 2029. Instead, the utility will employ clean-energy alternatives such as solar and energy storage to make up for their 1,660MW of generation capacity. In July, LADWP proposed building the largest capacity utility-scale solar battery project in the country to date. The plan, submitted by developer 8minute Solar Energy, would build as much as 400MW of solar capacity and 300MW of energy storage at the historically low price of US$19.97 per MWh. As of early August, approval is pending at the LADWP board.

Martyn1981

Nice little piece looking at the many benefits of co-locating PV and storage in the UK:

Solar-plus-storage vs grid enhancement, part IV

Large scale energy storage offers investors different revenue streams from grid balancing services, demand for which will be driven by the ever higher penetration of renewables. “Co-location of new solar assets with battery storage systems can unlock additional revenue streams and reduce the risks of merchant business models,” Aurora Energy wrote. Mass deployment of such assets can be expected to improve the technology used and the associated business models as a further bonus.

In good company

Uniting solar plants and storage will be decisive for the construction of profitable subsidy-free renewable energy in the U.K., claimed the report. “We find project internal rates of return [IRRs] of between 6.6% and 7.6% for hybrid assets deployed in 2020 in our base case market scenario, compared with 4% for standalone solar and battery assets,” the analysts wrote. Co-location of PV and storage can also reduce balance-of-system battery costs by up to half.

michaels

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Nice little piece looking at the many benefits of co-locating PV and storage in the UK:

Solar-plus-storage vs grid enhancement, part IV

Hmmm. Not meaning to feed the troll but didn't we have a thread on whether increased renewable penetration in teased the need for grid balancing services in relation to the recent blackout?

ABrass

There was a thread about that, and a second post somewhere saying that battery storage helped mitigate the worst of the issues. In short my interpretation of the data provided was that it seems that the increased RE component of the national grid supply does reduce the traditional inertia from big spinning turbines but it shouldn't be a show stopper once battery storage is more widespread.

Martyn1981

Not sure if anyone will be interested in this, but it's a CNBC (US news media) report on solar, giving background, cost declines etc - basically singing its praises.

But I found the second half interesting as it sets out the enormous changes to energy production that can be driven (and already are) by business simply choosing RE as their preferred energy choice.

Some of this might be greenwashing, or not, but either way it's looking like choosing RE is the more economic choice.

The Rise Of Solar Power

Martyn1981

Martyn1981 wrote: »

But I found the second half interesting as it sets out the enormous changes to energy production that can be driven (and already are) by business simply choosing RE as their preferred energy choice.

Oops! If I hadn't skimmed (too quickly) the news on Friday, I could have included a great example:

Google signs up to $2bn wind and solar investment

Google’s chief executive has revealed plans for the biggest renewable energy deal in corporate history.

Sundar Pichai said the clean energy deal will include 18 separate agreements to supply Google with electricity from wind and solar projects across the world.

The search engine’s green energy portfolio will grow by 40%, giving the company access to an extra 1.6 gigawatt of clean electricity – the equivalent capacity of a million solar rooftops, the company said.

Pichai said the latest package of deals will “spur the construction of more than $2bn in new energy infrastructure”, including millions of solar panels and hundreds of wind turbines across three continents.

“We’re not buying power from existing wind and solar farms, but instead are making long-term purchase commitments that result in the development of new projects,” he said.

NigeWick

Martyn1981 wrote: »

I found the second half interesting as it sets out the enormous changes to energy production that can be driven (and already are) by business simply choosing RE as their preferred energy choice.

I know there's a B&Q in Surrey powered by its own solar and renewables. I'm sure that was a monetary decision by the company.

Martyn1981

NigeWick wrote: »

I know there's a B&Q in Surrey powered by its own solar and renewables. I'm sure that was a monetary decision by the company.

A wins a win!

Totally hypotheticalising (and creating new words too), but if enough commercial demand switched to RE, or better still, financed the build out of equal volumes of RE generation, then this could tip the economics against FF generation much more quickly.

Not sure if that makes sense, but altering the demand side, might drive the supply side faster than national/international policies by governments?

Makes sense (probably not)?

1961Nick

Martyn1981 wrote: »

A wins a win!

Totally hypotheticalising (and creating new words too), but if enough commercial demand switched to RE, or better still, financed the build out of equal volumes of RE generation, then this could tip the economics against FF generation much more quickly.

Not sure if that makes sense, but altering the demand side, might drive the supply side faster than national/international policies by governments?

Makes sense (probably not)?

The problem for businesses is that very few own the premises that they trade from. I'm sure that a lot would invest in solar panels to cover those expansive roofs if a) they could get the landlords permission & b) they didn't face the cost of decommissioning if they moved on. Currently, there doesn't seem to be any enthusiasm amongst landlords to adopt solar ... maybe that's something the government could help fund?

Martyn1981

1961Nick wrote: »

The problem for businesses is that very few own the premises that they trade from. I'm sure that a lot would invest in solar panels to cover those expansive roofs if a) they could get the landlords permission & b) they didn't face the cost of decommissioning if they moved on. Currently, there doesn't seem to be any enthusiasm amongst landlords to adopt solar ... maybe that's something the government could help fund?

I was referring to buying green energy - "if enough commercial demand switched to RE"

A big enough switch to RE, or if you like, away from conventional mix, would drive the issue from the demand side. Perhaps many do already.