Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

Martyn1981

Always nice to see one idea/development leading to another. Here we have plans for seaweed farming within offshore wind farm areas.

Here comes the world’s first offshore wind seaweed farm

E-commerce giant Amazon is funding the world’s first commercial-scale offshore wind seaweed farm that will sit between turbines – and this project has the potential to achieve a lot of great things.

Offshore wind seaweed farm

The North Sea Farm 1 project, off the Netherlands coast, will consist of a a 10-hectare (25-acre) seaweed farm that is expected to produce at least 6,000kg of fresh seaweed in its first year.

It’s expected to become operational by the end of the year, and the first seaweed harvest is expected in spring 2024. The hope is that the project evolves into a blueprint for offshore seaweed farming that can be rolled out globally.

And seaweed has a lot of really cool benefits; it absorbs CO2 during photosynthesis, which can help to mitigate the effects of climate change. In fact, seaweed can absorb more CO2 per unit area than land-based plants, making it an effective tool for carbon sequestration.

It can provide habitats for marine life, including fish, crabs, and shellfish. By creating new habitats, seaweed farming can help shore up marine biodiversity.

Plus, we can eat it: It’s a nutritious food source that doesn’t require freshwater, fertilizer, or pesticides to grow. It can also be harvested year-round, and it can be used for a wide range of products, from food and cosmetics to biofuels and fertilizers.

Coastalwatch

gefnew said:

More proposed storage on the Scottish borders to use up the excess re.
Borders battery energy scheme passes planning hurdle - BBC News

It would appear that demand for gridscale storage is almost as insatiable as that for BEV's, so unless production is able to ramp up considerably to address this then chances of cost reductions percolating through into home storage appear somewhat limited.

On the positive side, at least production at scale must be taking place and while costs for this will be reducing I suspect the bigger players will already have gobbled up the lion's share leaving other markets to negotiate their own deals regarding any excess.

But I'm merely "shooting from the hip" so happy to be proved otherwise!

Storage key to Portugal’s solar targets, says GlobalData

The isolation of Portugal’s electrical grid is hindering the growth of renewables, according to GlobalData’s latest report. Storage will play a pivotal role if the country hopes to achieve its solar and renewable installation goals, it says.

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2023/02/21/storage-key-to-portugals-solar-targets-says-globaldata/

Martyn1981

Coastalwatch said:

On the positive side, at least production at scale must be taking place and while costs for this will be reducing I suspect the bigger players will already have gobbled up the lion's share leaving other markets to negotiate their own deals regarding any excess.

But I'm merely "shooting from the hip" so happy to be proved otherwise!

Hiya CW. Also shooting from the hip, but if I tell you what I'm basing my guesses on, then you can also 'play along at home'.

So, you've probably noticed that lots of the storage deployments in the news now mention Tesla Megapacks, so you can actually view the ordering page:

Order Megapack

Last time I looked, they were sold out till 2024 Q3, but now it's Q4. Also, and whilst I forget the exact price, the cost per Megapack (leaving defaults alone), was a little under $2m for the 4hr model, and a little over $2m for the 2hr version.

Now I see that the prices (like the waiting time) have risen to $2.1m and $2.6m (for the 4hr and 2hr respectively). Prices reduce as you order more. For huge installs of 1,000 units (3.9GWh), they 'only' cost $1.7m / $1.9m each. 

Obviously this may mean nothing, but given that they seem to be the largest supplier now, following their prices and delivery times may give some indication of supply and demand for such storage.

For reference I think some guestimates of current production is ~12GWh (annualised), with a target of 30GWh** (annualised) by end of 2023, so maybe prices and times will improve, but I suspect that we've now entered the age of larger* scale storage deployments. But prices may not fall soon, as Elon recently said that demand is practically unlimited.

*Still relatively small individually on a grid scale, and intraday, not to be confused with larger scale, longer term storage that may kick in towards the end of this decade?

Edit - ** Sorry should have been clearer, that 30GWh figure is just for Tesla's Lathrop facility where Megapacks are being built, not Tesla, nor the storage industry as a whole.

Coastalwatch

Martyn1981 said:

Coastalwatch said:

On the positive side, at least production at scale must be taking place and while costs for this will be reducing I suspect the bigger players will already have gobbled up the lion's share leaving other markets to negotiate their own deals regarding any excess.

But I'm merely "shooting from the hip" so happy to be proved otherwise!

Hiya CW. Also shooting from the hip, but if I tell you what I'm basing my guesses on, then you can also 'play along at home'.

So, you've probably noticed that lots of the storage deployments in the news now mention Tesla Megapacks, so you can actually view the ordering page:

Order Megapack

Last time I looked, they were sold out till 2024 Q3, but now it's Q4. Also, and whilst I forget the exact price, the cost per Megapack (leaving defaults alone), was a little under $2m for the 4hr model, and a little over $2m for the 2hr version.

Now I see that the prices (like the waiting time) have risen to $2.1m and $2.6m (for the 4hr and 2hr respectively). Prices reduce as you order more. For huge installs of 1,000 units (3.9GWh), they 'only' cost $1.7m / $1.9m each. 

Obviously this may mean nothing, but given that they seem to be the largest supplier now, following their prices and delivery times may give some indication of supply and demand for such storage.

For reference I think some guestimates of current production is ~12GWh (annualised), with a target of 30GWh** (annualised) by end of 2023, so maybe prices and times will improve, but I suspect that we've now entered the age of larger* scale storage deployments. But prices may not fall soon, as Elon recently said that demand is practically unlimited.

*Still relatively small individually on a grid scale, and intraday, not to be confused with larger scale, longer term storage that may kick in towards the end of this decade?

Edit - ** Sorry should have been clearer, that 30GWh figure is just for Tesla's Lathrop facility where Megapacks are being built, not Tesla, nor the storage industry as a whole.

That's interesting Mart although it did muddle my brain when trying to arrive at a cost/kWh, but effectively they have risen minimally for now!

In between I've received an email from ITS stating they had reduced some of their lines to clear space for new stock! One of the items being an 8.2 kWh storage battery for £2510 +vat. Checking back to last January the price was £2160+vat, so in spite of the recent "special offer" it still represents a 16% increase.

No idea how this compares(£/kWh) to a Megapack which does of course include installation cost!

Er, Fifteen all, your serve I believe!

Martyn1981

Coastalwatch said:

Martyn1981 said:

Coastalwatch said:

On the positive side, at least production at scale must be taking place and while costs for this will be reducing I suspect the bigger players will already have gobbled up the lion's share leaving other markets to negotiate their own deals regarding any excess.

But I'm merely "shooting from the hip" so happy to be proved otherwise!

Hiya CW. Also shooting from the hip, but if I tell you what I'm basing my guesses on, then you can also 'play along at home'.

So, you've probably noticed that lots of the storage deployments in the news now mention Tesla Megapacks, so you can actually view the ordering page:

Order Megapack

Last time I looked, they were sold out till 2024 Q3, but now it's Q4. Also, and whilst I forget the exact price, the cost per Megapack (leaving defaults alone), was a little under $2m for the 4hr model, and a little over $2m for the 2hr version.

Now I see that the prices (like the waiting time) have risen to $2.1m and $2.6m (for the 4hr and 2hr respectively). Prices reduce as you order more. For huge installs of 1,000 units (3.9GWh), they 'only' cost $1.7m / $1.9m each. 

Obviously this may mean nothing, but given that they seem to be the largest supplier now, following their prices and delivery times may give some indication of supply and demand for such storage.

For reference I think some guestimates of current production is ~12GWh (annualised), with a target of 30GWh** (annualised) by end of 2023, so maybe prices and times will improve, but I suspect that we've now entered the age of larger* scale storage deployments. But prices may not fall soon, as Elon recently said that demand is practically unlimited.

*Still relatively small individually on a grid scale, and intraday, not to be confused with larger scale, longer term storage that may kick in towards the end of this decade?

Edit - ** Sorry should have been clearer, that 30GWh figure is just for Tesla's Lathrop facility where Megapacks are being built, not Tesla, nor the storage industry as a whole.

That's interesting Mart although it did muddle my brain when trying to arrive at a cost/kWh, but effectively they have risen minimally for now!

In between I've received an email from ITS stating they had reduced some of their lines to clear space for new stock! One of the items being an 8.2 kWh storage battery for £2510 +vat. Checking back to last January the price was £2160+vat, so in spite of the recent "special offer" it still represents a 16% increase.

No idea how this compares(£/kWh) to a Megapack which does of course include installation cost!

Er, Fifteen all, your serve I believe!

Yep, I saw the same when looking at Givenergy products, where prices had risen, so I think your hip shooting is correct and whilst costs of manufacturing may be falling as production ramps, the final costs are rising as demand for materials is currently exceeding supplies.

Reminds me of our chats, and news posts on here regarding the many different hoped for alternative battery* chemical compositions. They don't necessarily have to be better, or even quite as good as current lithium based batts, they just need to spread material demand across more supply lines, to be cost competitive (economically viable), and at the same time, reduce some demand for lithium based materials (or perhaps better worded as, slowdown the rising demand).

No idea on the larger economics, though I assume there's a study / report or just news article on it, but in the UK / EU prices will also have increased due to the spike in demand for storage (and PV) following the invasion of Ukraine and leccy price spikes. So that will have distorted supply and demand too, impacting prices.

So going back to your OP, I can't see any reason why you aren't completely right that price reductions may not yet be percolating down. We may have accelerated (due to invasion of Ukraine) outside of normal increased supply cost reductions, into rising costs due to demand rising even faster.

Good news in terms of the eventual shift to RE, batts and 'electrify everything' with the acceleration, but bad news for today's batt prices. Wish I'd jumped two years ago!


*Here I'm talking about battery storage as chemical batteries (rather than other types of storage like LAES, compressed CO2 etc).

Coastalwatch

Martyn1981 said:

*Here I'm talking about battery storage as chemical batteries (rather than other types of storage like LAES, compressed CO2 etc).

I guess for domestic applications then other storage applications are rather limited, but yes, longer term storage or dare I even suggest alternative means of generation are needed.

While we are trying to make ourselves as energy independent as possible and once Kirk Hill comes online then as far as total consumption vs generation is concerned it will likely be achieved I still have this nagging doubt about the wind not always blowing and leaving us wth a deficit at some point during the darker months. With batt storage and V2H(fingers crossed) perhaps not so much of a problem for a day or three but any longer period would prove troublesome.

Living on the coast it's rather frustrating that potential energy sources provided by the sea couldn't be harnessed for us to take advantage of. Even Ripple have baulked at engaging in this style of generation so it would appear our options along those lines are unlikely in the near term.

Other suggestions always welcome.

Martyn1981

You ask CW, and as if by magic, an article on ocean/wave energy appears, asking the question:

Wave Power: What’s Taking You So Long?

US Pokes The Sleeping Giant Of Ocean Wave Energy

Tapping ocean waves to generate clean electricity sounds simple enough, but the devil is in the details. Corrosion and durability issues are daunting out there on the open seas. Nevertheless, the US is racing to grab a share of the Earth’s wave energy, and the reason is simple. An estimated 1,170 terawatt-hours per year in recoverable wave resources sits along the shores of the US and Puerto Rico, accounting for a sizeable portion of the nation’s annual electricity demand.

Martyn1981

Not exactly fun, sexy and entertaining news, but still quite important:

UK reforms large-scale renewables planning

The UK government has published a policy paper to reform the planning process to speed up the delivery of large-scale renewable energy and other infrastructure projects.

The Action Plan for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects includes measures that will streamline delivery of offshore wind as well as support economic growth, bolster energy security and deliver net zero.

A new fast track process will be piloted, with powers for the Secretary of State to set shorter timelines for certain projects.

The changes also include increasing community engagement and making environmental protections more effective.

“The current planning system moves at a glacial pace – it can take four or five years to get approval for an offshore wind farm.

“If we’re to cut people’s energy bills, boost Britain’s energy security and meet our net zero target, the government must reduce unnecessary bureaucracy and streamline the way the system works to make it more agile and responsive.”    

Coastalwatch

Martyn1981 said:

You ask CW, and as if by magic, an article on ocean/wave energy appears, asking the question:

Wave Power: What’s Taking You So Long?

US Pokes The Sleeping Giant Of Ocean Wave Energy

Tapping ocean waves to generate clean electricity sounds simple enough, but the devil is in the details. Corrosion and durability issues are daunting out there on the open seas. Nevertheless, the US is racing to grab a share of the Earth’s wave energy, and the reason is simple. An estimated 1,170 terawatt-hours per year in recoverable wave resources sits along the shores of the US and Puerto Rico, accounting for a sizeable portion of the nation’s annual electricity demand.

Cheers for that Mart.

Also arriving subsequently was the passage below taken from an update received late this morning from Simec Atlantis Energy upon the Meygen Phase 1 Tidal Array.

The MeyGen operating array continues to generate electricity consistently with turbine availabilities of more
than 90%. The array is generating 1GWh of electricity per month from the three installed turbines and has
become the first tidal stream array in the world to generate 50GWh of electricity, this is more than 50% of the
total global generation from all other tidal stream devices.

They had secured a CfD price for 15 years to enable further development for future arrays to take place.

It also touched upon further development of the old Uskmouth Coal Powered site now transitioning to Battery Energy Storage Sites with plans to eventually reach 1 GW of capacity.

So progress on both Tidal and Storage!

Martyn1981

As per the title, London now needs to focus on heating sources to continue the reduction of NOx etc.

Interesting that the article mentions hydrogen boilers, which (personally) I think is a bust flush, due to the enormous cost and energy needed for green H2. Handy chart I saw recently for comparison:

Pollutionwatch: London Ulez cuts traffic fumes but heating is concern

Research on the air in London suggests the ultra low emission zone (Ulez) may be working better than expected, but the heating of buildings may become a barrier to reducing air pollution.

The research was done from the top of the BT Tower. Sam Cliff, of the University of York, said: “The observatory is a tiny room, 35 floors up, surrounded by telecommunications kit and crammed full of scientific instruments. The view is great but on windy days maintenance can be really challenging.” From the top of the tower, Cliff measured air pollution drifting upwards from the streets and buildings below, allowing him to gradually map the sources within about 3.5km.

Air pollution hotspots included the buses and taxis feeding Euston station, the congested streets around Oxford Street and Piccadilly, and the combined heating and power generation systems in Bloomsbury.

Prof Ally Lewis, of the National Centre for Atmospheric Science, said: “Getting combustion out of cities is central to further improving air quality in the UK. This means tackling more than just wood-burning stoves. Burning natural gas, or possibly burning hydrogen in the future, will keep pollution sources close to where people live. We will either need to electrify the heating of homes and businesses or think much more seriously about how pollution from gas burning can be cleaned up, as we currently do for cars, trucks and buses.”