Tesla megapack battery

[OVERKILL]

On the heels of the "world's biggest battery" that was deployed in Australia comes its successor, the "Megapack" battery:
Tesla Megapack Battery

Originally Posted by Tesla
Megapack significantly reduces the complexity of large-scale battery storage and provides an easy installation and connection process. Each Megapack comes from the factory fully-assembled with up to 3 megawatt hours (MWhs) of storage and 1.5 MW of inverter capacity, building on Powerpack's engineering with an AC interface and 60% increase in energy density to achieve significant cost and time savings compared to other battery systems and traditional fossil fuel power plants. Using Megapack, Tesla can deploy an emissions-free 250 MW, 1 GWh power plant in less than three months on a three-acre footprint - four times faster than a traditional fossil fuel power plant of that size. Megapack can also be DC-connected directly to solar, creating seamless renewable energy plants.


No mention of cost.

The idea here appears to be courting the high margin peaking roles currently occupied by gas plants, which are constantly idled to be able to step-in when required. A battery could be charged during periods of low output.

Contrary to the whole VRE gymnastics scenario, where many (most?) people focus their attention when thinking of battery storage, I think this has the potential to work very well in areas where hydro isn't viable and could supplement baseload nuclear, eliminating the gas peaker role. This would allow nukes to run at a higher CF and allow greater penetration, as periods of lower demand could be used to charge the storage medium.

 

[Danno]

From other discussions with our Aussie power expert, this battery setup plays in the high cost power transition periods.

The battery output is measured in minutes before needing recharge.

Almost like day trading the stock market, but doing that with the energy market.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by Danno
From other discussions with our Aussie power expert, this battery setup plays in the high cost power transition periods.

The battery output is measured in minutes before needing recharge.

Almost like day trading the stock market, but doing that with the energy market.


Yep, you'd need a large amount of capacity for it to be able to handle peaking.

for example, here's today's Ontario energy generation profile:

So the base was around 15,000MW, almost entirely met by nuke/hydro. Wind is at like 8% CF during the summer, so its contribution was weak. You can see gas handled basically all the peaking, with some ramp in hydro. So, assuming you had this 15,000MW base, total generation output hit around 21,000MW, so that's a 6,000MW differential between available baseload and peaking requirements.

Using the same above numbers, if nuclear capacity was increased to 15,000MW, hydro would shift up and could spill at the lower demand periods, this would leave us with a 3,000MW peak for about a 3 hour period, which is within the 4hr window provided by the battery (based on the 250MW, 1GWh model). This would require 12 of these units and then what would the lifespan be? Contrarily, you could just build enough nuclear to cover the entire baseload period and use hydro for the rest, but my initial example scenario in the OP was for where hydro couldn't make up a large part of the mix like it does in Ontario.

 

[mk378]

If you have the gas plants up 24 hours, how would batteries help? The extra source to recharge batteries at night would have to be gas.

Notice that the wind is still cranking through this particular night. If there was about 5x the wind capacity there would be a surplus at night without any gas.

 

[JHZR2]

Such systems can be used for "clean peaking" when other generation assets are brought up from standby. Big data and good analytics will help forecast trends to identify when assets should be readied. The battery doesn't need to stay on forever, just to pickup instantaneous load, and then act, like a hybrid car, as a parallel source so the engine can be brought up at the appropriate rate.

There have been large batteries with special dispatch readily making money doing frequency regulation. With a big enough battery, the cycles can be shallow and benign. You still do have calendar life issues, so be ready for a pack replacement in 10 years. That said, the materials in these batteries are primarily carbon, aluminum, copper and steel.

 

[Shannow]

In Oz, rather than their initial mission statement, of being able to store renewables, and send them into the afternoon peak, they are being used fro frequency control, which has become attrocious now that big spinnny things are being shut down.

These are measured and paid for in 6 second, 60 second, and 5 miute responses.

They aren't being used for "storage" per se.

(Oh, and Tesla might be working on a new battery because the old ones they completley misunderstood how the grid works...using automotive battery cycling models doesn't work in the electricity market - I'm still trying to find out about their big fire.).

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted by Shannow
I'm still trying to find out about their big fire.).


?????

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by mk378
If you have the gas plants up 24 hours, how would batteries help? The extra source to recharge batteries at night would have to be gas.


We often have days of no gas. It is hot, so people are running their A/C, so evening/overnight demand is higher right now. That said, as I described, if you push the baseload (nuke/hydro) curve up to displace gas, you could leverage sufficient battery capacity to do that role. Whether it would be cost effective? That's a whole other discussion. In Ontario, I don't think it would make sense, you could just build sufficient nuke capacity that peaking can be handled by hydro.

Originally Posted by mk378
Notice that the wind is still cranking through this particular night. If there was about 5x the wind capacity there would be a surplus at night without any gas.


I see you missed the part where I said wind was at around 8% CF. We have ~4,500MW of wind, what you are seeing is its poor summer performance. This graph I created from a few weeks ago may help here:

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted by JHZR2
Originally Posted by Shannow
I'm still trying to find out about their big fire.).


?????


Have heard rumblings around the industry
* that one of their utiity batteries went up;
* that power walls are failing, and potentially recall/replacement as automotive cycling and home/utility are different and weren't factored in.

Am trying to find more, but the timing of the new battery fits at least the rumous.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted by Shannow
Originally Posted by JHZR2
Originally Posted by Shannow
I'm still trying to find out about their big fire.).


?????


Have heard rumblings around the industry
* that one of their utiity batteries went up;
* that power walls are failing, and potentially recall/replacement as automotive cycling and home/utility are different and weren't factored in.

Am trying to find more, but the timing of the new battery fits at least the rumous.


I had heard that CA building codes disallowed the installation within a building envelope. Also rumors that I haven't verified. Living outdoors in the sun would cause failure. I'd suspect that the power wall design would be more prone to getting hit then the ones integrated into a car sitting in complete shade (though the cabin gets hot).

 

[Shannow]

Batteries are going in residentailly...but the codes are difficult.

THey started with (obviously) Lead Acid, and near zero issues.

As the technologies have become what they are, the authorities are flip floppingaround codes that require fie rated blast wall, versus inside the house, in the Laundry.. When they start leaning towards the fomer, the industry complains that's a "ban" as high density living woud preclude it being an option for residents.

I'm mixed...but I wouldn't have a power wall inside...well I wouldn't have one regardless.

 

[PandaBear]

The way I see it these batteries should be mainly used as a hedge against price gouging.

Once in a while, back when I was using PG&E's smart rate plan, I see 15 days of 1pm-7pm that charges 60c/kwh in exchange for 2c/kwh cheaper the rest of the year. Now with Silicon Valley Green Energy, the peak time is 3-7pm and semi-peak is 1-3pm and 7-9pm. The generation rate is also less aggressive (i.e. no more 60c/kwh, but 15c/kwh vs 25c/kwh for example).

You can look at demand and supply from engineering perspective, but since Enron we know we cannot count on any single source or company, they will take advantage of the gouging if they can.

 

[Cujet]

Off grid batteries have a KWh cost. Often about 30 cents per KWh delivered from the batteries. Due to the high cost, limited capacity and short life of the batteries.

While modern production methods and capacity are much improved, I can't imagine the mega pack battery is cheap by KWh provided over its lifespan.