Navigant Research Blog

Big Savings from Replacing Diesel with Storage

— July 6, 2014

In my previous blog on diesel and energy storage, I discussed the payback period for energy storage in a remote microgrid.  What is the value of reducing diesel usage in a microgrid, practically speaking?

The table below illustrates the first-year savings of displacing 15% of the diesel generation in microgrids of different sizes using energy storage.  The average installed energy storage cost in this model is $2,112 per kW, and the assumption for the minimum cost of diesel fuel is $1.09 per liter, with the maximum cost in the model averaging $3.27 per liter.  Since the installation of storage is a one-time cost that occurs in the first year, the savings go up after that.

Size Distribution of Deployed Microgrids and First-Year Fuel Savings
at Low and High Diesel Costs: 4Q 2013

ESMG table

(Source: Navigant Research)

According to Navigant Research’s Microgrid Deployment Tracker 2Q14, 231 deployed microgrids have diesel generation capacity.  This means that 38% of microgrids have diesel gensets, and overall, gensets account for 11% of microgrid capacity globally.  Only 40% of the 79 microgrids above 10 MW include diesel generators, and smaller systems are less likely to have diesel generation.  Less than one-third of the microgrids below 500 kW rely at least partially on diesel.

Taking the example of a large microgrid system, because this is where the savings are the greatest, microgrids over 10 MW average 42.7 MW of capacity.

Still Too Costly

Assuming a microgrid does in fact have diesel generation, if a 42 MW microgrid replaced 15% of its total capacity (and assuming at least 15% of that capacity would be displacing diesel gensets) with storage, it could save between $10.9 million and $53.4 million per year after storage costs are recouped.  The total savings for all of the large microgrid systems in Navigant Research’s Microgrid Deployment Tracker would amount to $2.2 billion to $10.8 billion per year in diesel fuel using just 200 MW of energy storage.

So why is storage not more popular in remote microgrids?  Chances are it’s because $2,112 per kW installed is still not competitive in most markets where storage is displacing traditional power generation – even with the benefits of volume manufacturing.  Companies such as Samsung SDI and LG Chem are manufacturing lithium ion cells for the grid at great volume, but it’s still challenging to deliver competitive prices to the customer.  This is because a large portion of costs has nothing to do with the core technology, and instead is related to project management, system design and integration, and installation.  As more companies such as Bosch and Schneider Electric enter the market and bring power electronics and energy management expertise to the storage space, these costs will come down significantly, benefiting the entire supply chain. 

 

What Constitutes “Grid-Wide” Storage?

— June 25, 2014

A recent article in The New York Times made the claim that energy storage technology is “decades away from grid-wide use.”  Reporter Jim Malewitz did not define “grid-wide,” so it is difficult to understand how this term is defined for the purposes of the story.  We can examine that prediction, though, based on various measures.

One measure could be grid generation capacity of the capacity of installed energy storage.  Given that on its own the U.S. grid has about 1,058 GW of total generation capacity, energy storage rightfully appears to be a drop in the bucket – to be precise, 0.07% of grid generation capacity excluding pumped storage and 2.2% including pumped storage.  It’s worth noting, however, that the solar PV industry is considered to be successful and growing, and currently represents about 1.1% of total generation capacity in the United States.  Moreover, the pipeline for energy storage is expanding rapidly.  Approximately 13,000 MW of storage capacity is in the pipeline – 3,000 MW of which is advanced batteries, compressed air, flywheels, and power-to-gas.

Energy Storage Capacity, Installed and Announced, World Markets: 2Q 2014

(Source: Navigant Research)

The First Thousand

A second measure could be the number of markets where storage is present and the variety of technologies in the market.  Navigant Research is currently in the process of updating its Energy Storage Tracker, which tracks 30 energy storage technologies in over 600 projects – some of which include more than one storage system.  Overall, 952 systems in 51 countries are tracked in the database.

Worldwide, there are 2,497 MW of deployed advanced energy storage projects – this excludes pumped storage, a mature technology that accounts for 124 GW installed.  Asia Pacific continues to be the world leader in deployed capacity of energy storage, with 1,184 MW of deployed capacity, which represents 43% of global capacity.  New pumped storage makes up nearly 60% of Asia Pacific’s capacity, followed by sodium-sulfur batteries, with 31% market share.  The market share of advanced lithium ion batteries is growing quickly in Asia Pacific, with 74 MW installed currently.

Demand Flattens

Western Europe (762 MW deployed, 28% of global capacity) is primarily composed of power-to-gas, compressed air, new pumped storage, and molten salt technologies.  North America (725 MW deployed, up from 566 MW in 3Q13) is more evenly divided among technologies, with compressed air, flywheel, lithium ion, thermal, and advanced lead-acid batteries composing a majority of the capacity.  Clearly, a number of markets and technologies are being deployed across grids globally.

One other measure could be the growth of storage relative to a traditional industry.  In 2007, 28 MW of advanced energy storage were installed.  In the subsequent 6 years, 1,300 MW have been installed.  More specifically, installed energy storage grew 28% between 3Q13 and 2Q14.   In contrast, electricity sales have decreased over the past several years in the United States, and the U.S. Energy Information Administration predicts that electric demand growth will average less than 1% per year between 2012 and 2040.

Although energy storage is unlikely to revolutionize the global grid system in the near term, it will certainly begin to scale up rapidly in the next 3 to 5 years.  Perhaps then it will be closer to grid-wide.

 

Tesla Looks to Fuel a Battery Revolution

— June 18, 2014

Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla Motors, stunned the automotive world with his announcement that he was making all his company’s electric vehicle (EV) patents open source.  “Tesla will not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology,” he said on his blog.  Musk explained that he decided to do this because the “world would all benefit from a common, rapidly-evolving technology platform.”

Automotive companies are well-known for developing proprietary solutions for almost anything in an effort to get one step ahead of the competition, even for a short time.  But this approach means that often the opportunity to share in the rapid growth of a new technology is lost, and suppliers can miss out on the potential for much higher volumes.  Some have speculated that this change in attitude to patents is a move to create bigger demand for battery cells from Tesla’s planned Gigafactory.

Weight and Range

Conventionally powered vehicles are still the main business of all major automakers, which are continually investing in new ways to make these vehicles more efficient.  One of the current trends is to develop stop-start technology to capture some of the efficiency gains of a full hybrid at a fraction of the cost premium.  Full details on the latest developments are discussed in Navigant Research’s 48 Volt Systems for Stop-Start Vehicles and Micro Hybrids report.

When designing an electric or electrically assisted powertrain, manufacturers have to weigh a number of characteristics for each particular model.  Not all hybrid vehicles and EVs are optimized for economy.  Some use the stored energy to boost power or drive an additional pair of wheels.  Bigger batteries cost more and also add weight and take up space, but they provide greater electric-only range.  Small, light vehicles can travel further per kilowatt-hour of battery capacity than larger, heavier vehicles.  These compromises are difficult to resolve, and battery manufacturers have a role to play.

Step Up

Anticipated sales of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) are projected to be large enough to lead the demand for lithium ion (Li-ion) batteries in the automotive world.  Even though sales numbers of hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) dwarf those of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) and BEVs, a much larger battery capacity means that at least 60% of the Li-ion batteries made for automotive use will end up in a BEV over the next couple of years.  That percentage will increase slowly until the end of this decade, after which stop-start vehicles will begin to influence the distribution.  Maybe this move from Tesla will be an incentive for the established carmakers to put more effort into their BEV product range.

Navigant Research expects that the overall market for vehicle Li-ion battery revenue will reach $26 billion by 2023, and that revenue could exceed that if newly emerging 48V micro hybrid technology delivers on its promise of fuel efficiency at a low-cost increment, and a significant number of original equipment manufacturers choose to implement it with Li-ion battery packs.  In addition, the expected steady lowering of per-kilowatt-hour cost will encourage the market if manufacturers pass the savings on to customers.  Full details of the automotive market for Li-ion batteries are covered in Navigant Research’s report, Electric Vehicle Batteries.

 

DC Fast Charging Gains Momentum

— June 17, 2014

While still in some ways the forgotten child of the charging family, direct current (DC) fast charging is starting to take on some momentum.  At the Electric Drive Transportation Association Annual Meeting in May, BMW and Nissan joined ABB and Fuji Electric on a panel to discuss their experiences in the United States with fast charging and what they see as the main barrier to further development of the market.

The panel addressed three technical questions that continue to hang over the DC charging market.  The first question was whether the industry would ever resolve the dueling standards issue and officially adopt either the CHAdeMO standard prevalent in Japan or the SAE’s combo standard being adopted by European automakers and deployed in the United States.  The clear answer from the panel was that both are here to stay.  As a proponent of the CHAdeMO standard, Nissan has a head start over the combo charger supporters, having deployed over 100 CHAdeMO stations in the United States at Nissan dealerships in addition to its widespread deployments in Japan.  Navigant Research’s view is that, over time, the combo charger will start to edge out CHAdeMO – simply because more automakers will adopt it.  But a few markets, most notably Japan, will stick with the CHAdeMO standard, having made significant investments in deploying it.

Fast Is Better

The second question was on whether battery degradation is a concern.  The consensus was that it is not.  Cliff Fietzek, manager of Connected E-Mobility at BMW and David Peterson, EV Regional Manager at Nissan North America, asserted that no one is more concerned about protecting the battery than they are, and they are comfortable with the use of DC charging for their electric vehicles (EVs).

The final technical question is still open for debate: whether fast charging is more optimal at 50 kW or 20 kW to 25 kW.  ABB is offering both 20 kW and 50 kW units, while Fuji has focused exclusively on the 25 kW size.  Larry Butkovich, general manager of EV Systems at Fuji Electric Corporation of America, made the case for the 25 kW charger, available on the ChargePoint network in California for over a year.  According to Butkovich, the average driver stops for 20 to 30 minutes and gets around a half a charge, with an average output of 18 kW.  The typical fee paid is $6 to $8.  Butkovich noted that usage dropped once the fees were instituted but quickly bounced back, and the company thinks a business case can be made for fast charging.

Distance versus Speed

The case for lower-power fast charging centers on the time it takes to bring a battery to 80% state of charge (SOC).  BMW’s Fietzek noted that a 50 kW unit will get a 20 kWh battery to 80% SOC in 20 minutes, while a 25 kW charger takes 35 minutes.  Fuji’s experience suggests that a driver will be satisfied with a 20- to 30-minute charge that doesn’t quite reach 80% SOC.

Given that the panelists cited cost as one of the biggest barriers to this market, downsizing to a less expensive 20 kW or 25 kW fast charger will make sense in applications where the charger is not expected to enable long-distance trips.  The lower-power units are also less likely to trigger costly demand charges, which are another major barrier to securing more fast charging locations.  These units are poised to capture more market share in the United States ‑ especially for operators not involved in deployments supported by the Department of Energy or the big automakers.

 

Blog Articles

Most Recent

By Date

Tags

Clean Transportation, Electric Vehicles, Energy Storage, Policy & Regulation, Renewable Energy, Smart Energy Practice, Smart Energy Program, Smart Grid Practice, Smart Transportation Practice, Utility Innovations

By Author


{"userID":"","pageName":"Energy Storage","path":"\/tag\/energy-storage","date":"7\/23\/2014"}