Tag:

energy storage

Solar Energy Corp Of India Issues 100 MW Solar Energy Storage Tender

written by saurabh

The Solar Energy Corporation of India has issued among the first tenders for solar power projects with storage capacity.

A tender for 100 MW storage capacity for a large solar power park has been issued by the Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI). The storage will be part of the 1 GW Kadapa solar power park approved under the central government’s plan to setup around 25 GW of ultra mega solar power projects across the country.

Last month, media outlets had reported that SECI will auction an additional 200 MW storage capacity linked with large-scale solar power park in Karnataka. Theses auctions are part of an overall strategy to seamlessly integrate renewable energy projects into the existing power grid.

Earlier this year, Indian newspapers also reported that the Ministry of New & Renewable Energy was considering to launch a National Mission on Energy Storage. No details of the said mission are currently available, however.

International companies are already planning to bid for the impending tenders. Chinese battery maker BYD and Canada-based project developer SkyPower Global entered an agreement to bid for solar power projects in India soon after the news of 100 MW storage tender for Andhra Pradesh solar power park was reported.

August 27, 2016 0 comment

Denmark Announces 100% Renewable Goal

written by

Denmark has just one-upped its status as the most cutting edge sustainable country in the world. They have committed to a goal of 100% renewable energy by the year 2050. That goal is not just limited to electric generation as other countries have done. They are including transportation as well. No burning of fossil fuels by 2050.

If that seems like an unrealistically lofty goal, keep in mind that these are the Danes we are talking about, who already get over 40% of their electricity from over 5,000 wind turbines, with every intention of making that 50% by 2020. Fossil fuel consumption is expected to fall by 20% over that same period.

While wind has carried most of the weight going forward, the latest initiative is more comprehensive. For starters, energy efficiency will play a major role. An intermediate target is looking for a 7% overall decrease in consumption from 2010 levels by 2020. Energy companies will be given specific targets.

Industrial heating and cooling is also a major part of the plan. Biomass will be substituted for coal on a large scale, for both heating and electricity. Subsidies will be provided for geothermal energy.

Also included are subsidies for energy efficient production processes, combined heat and power (CHP) applications, biogas, and smart grid. You could say the Danes are leaving no stone unturned in their search for a totally clean energy future.

What makes Denmark so successful while so many other nations are falling short?

According to Kurt Kornbluth, director of the Program for International Energy Technologies at the University of California, Davis, the first thing is that the government and the people are in accord. The government is willing to enact policies directed towards this shared goal, including a carbon tax, and feed-in tariffs, which the people were willing to accommodate. It also helps that as Rasmus Helveg Petersen, Minister for Climate, Energy and Building, has said, Denmark has been focusing on energy in a concerted manner ever since the oil crisis of 1973.

The second thing the Danes did was to establish wind cooperatives which funneled profits from excess power generation back to individuals and communities. BY 2001, the cooperative had over 100,000 members and owned a total of 86% of the nation’s wind power. That’s buy-in with a capital “B”.”When they see those turbines spinning,” said Kornbluth, they don’t say, that’s ugly, they say, that’s income.”

The third and final factor was a little bit of geopolitical luck. Denmark is positioned between Norway, home of abundant hydropower, and Sweden, which has lots of nuclear. The two form a gigantic grid that can readily provide backup when Denmark needs it. They can often be counted on to purchase excess wind power from Denmark when it is available as well.

Despite all of this good news, the Danes are facing some new challenges as they push into these unprecedented levels of renewable generation. As they are beginning to find out, each electrical grid has a level of renewables that they can economically support before they become saturated. That’s because the “baseline” power plants, that run on gas, coal, or nuclear are no longer economical if they are only used once in a while, when the wind has stopped or the sun has set. That’s because they can’t compete the rest of the time, with energy sources that are essentially free.

It’s not that this can’t be done. It’s just that the system hasn’t been designed for it. Real-time pricing and energy storage, an option that California is aggressively pursuing, and smart grids are some tools that can be applied. In the meantime, some utilities are being subsidized to operate plants at a loss, which is not sustainable.

“We are really worried about this situation,” Anders Stouge, the deputy director general of the Danish Energy Association, said. “If we don’t do something, we will in the future face higher and higher risks of blackouts.”

All of this is before Denmark has really started to ramp up on electric vehicles. That could put considerable further strain on the electric. But it could also be a blessing in disguise. Tens of thousands of electric cars could serve as a massive electric storage reservoir at times when most of those vehicles are parked, like at night. This is a synergistic relationship that the architects of tomorrow’s smart grid are counting on.

Article by RP Siegel of Justmeans, appearing courtesy 3BL Media.

November 18, 2014 0 comment

Debate Over Value of Renewables Brings in Heavy Hitters

written by

A recent article in The Economist describes a blog post by Charles Frank of the Brookings Institute in which he questions the methods that have been used to compare renewable energy sources with more traditional sources like coal, gas and nuclear.

Drawing on the work of Paul Joskow of MIT, Frank claims that the generally accepted levelized cost models, which essentially divide the total lifetime system cost by the total amount of electricity produced, do not adequately discount the value of renewables sources like solar and wind based on their intermittent nature. Joskow’s reasoning is that since these intermittent sources vary their output at different times of the day and the year, that should be reflected in their value, since the demand for, and the price of electricity also varies throughout the day, at least in the commercial market.

So, given that wind, for example, produces electricity mostly at night, when the power is less valuable, that should be reflected in the value of a wind investment. Solar, on the other hand produces mostly at mid-day, when the power is most valuable, so it may be getting short-changed by the levelized cost approach.

Frank started with Joskow’s premise, then went on to perform a detailed analysis of various energy sources, based on avoided emissions and avoided costs, which revealed, he says, that contrary to popular belief, solar and wind are the least cost-effective way of producing low carbon electricity, followed by hydro, nuclear, and finally at the top of the list is combined cycle gas turbine power. Written from the perspective of building new electric generation capacity, Frank concludes, “Assuming that reductions in carbon dioxide emissions are valued at $50 per metric ton and the price of natural gas is not much greater than $16 per million Btu, the net benefits of new nuclear, hydro, and natural gas combined cycle plants far outweigh the net benefits of new wind or solar plants.”

The problem with an analysis like this is, given the rapidity with which renewable energy costs are dropping, trying to compare them with traditional sources is akin to trying to catch a falling knife. Frank’s data was obsolete by the time the ink dried on the page.

In addition, the analysis is highly sensitive to the eventual market price for carbon, which could swing the results dramatically. Also not considered is the impact of energy storage which could easily neutralize the liabilities that form the basis for Frank’s thesis.

But Amory Lovins, of the Rocky Mountain Institute, has already demonstrated that the perceived need for storage has been overstated. Smart grid and smart grid operators will be able to dynamically reconcile supply with demand far more effectively than originally thought, through what Lovins calls choreography. Yes, wind and sun are intermittent, but they are also fairly predictable. The tools available for and acceptance of demand management (can you wait a few seconds for a spike to pass before your air conditioner kicks in?) are also gaining in importance.

Given the broad coverage this story received, Lovins felt the need to weigh in here with a written rebuttal to correct what he felt were significant errors that led to erroneous conclusions.

Lovins points out that correcting nine of Frank’s incorrect assumptions reverses the conclusion to fall in line with the order that the marketplace has consistently chosen as the best investment for the money: hydro, wind, solar, gas, and nuclear. Says Lovins, Frank assumed the both wind and solar were twice as costly and half as productive as they actually are today. He also assumed gas productivity to be twice what it is and ignored the impacts of both methane leakage (a very serious greenhouse gas contributor) and price volatility. Indeed the climate impact of methane leakage (not to mention the environmental impacts of fracking) is severe enough to have caused some experts to question the value of switching away from coal.

Rounding out the list, are out of date assumptions regarding the construction cost (low by half) and operating cost (low by 80%) of nuclear plants. Frank’s assertion leaned heavily on the premise that a good deal of new generating capacity is needed (which it isn’t), and he did so without taking energy efficiency opportunities into account. While Frank has brought a fresh analytical slant to this important problem, when applied with the most recent data it produces the same conclusion as the prevailing approach. In other words, although the variation of the value of electricity produced at different times had not been taken into account by prior analyses, the impact of doing so was not sufficient to change the overall conclusion.

Article by RP Siegel of Justmeans, appearing courtesy 3BL Media.

September 5, 2014 0 comment

Let’s Stop Just Consuming and Become Part of the Internet of Energy

written by CleanTechies.com Contributor

Ryan Wartena, CEO and founder of Growing Energy Labs, could have decided to create a new, inexpensive battery for energy storage, based on his experience working at the US Naval Research Lab in Washington, D.C., where he learned how to make micro batteries.

When he started GELI, his partner was working at Harvard University, and Wartena was at MIT.

His ultimate goal was to boost the use of energy storage so that “we can run the world on renewable energy,” he says.

And that’s all about networking energy storage on the grid – and ensuring more consumers become producers.

“We could have started a new battery company to make a cheaper battery,” he says. But the real obstacle to getting more energy storage online is the automation related to the energy services. It’s all about the “Internet of Energy,” the business and operational layer associated with energy production and storage, Wartena says.

So Wartena decided to focus on software—creating an “operating system” for energy.

While there are lots of hardware systems available, he saw a dearth of “platforms,” or operating systems. And as we add electric vehicles, renewable energy and energy storage to energy system, we need such operating systems more than ever.

For example, if companies are generating more power than they need using renewable energy, and selling that power to the utility, they need an energy operating system to allow them to track changing prices, generate and store power, and sell it back to the grid.

That’s where GELI’s software comes in.

In a microgrid, GELI’s software makes operational decisions based on the price of power and energy, in addition to the electrical status and activity of the microgrid itself and other system components. It optimizes the energy storage system within the context of the microgrid and the power grid.

For this work, GELI recently garnered an Innovation Award by Energy Storage North America. The awards identified the leading energy storage projects in North America.

The company’s business model focuses on getting energy storage out there as quickly as possible. Rather than offer a turnkey system, the company brings different components together, provides integration software, and lets its customers—solar developers—buy from original equipment manufacturers.

“We provide the software and define the systems so they can go to OEMs and get components; this results in lower-cost systems,” he says.

For example, the company now has a microgrid in Marin County that integrates diesel, solar, and some facility loads. Another project in Los Angeles focuses on demand-charge management behind the meter.

Craig Wilkins, chairman and founder of ViZn Energy Systems, which produces large-scale energy storage technology, agrees that integration is key.

“In a microgrid, a little micro environment, you have few assets to pull from, unlike the grid,” he says. If all you have is solar and wind, the battery is the focal point. It’s the energy reservoir. You need to shift energy from one part of the day to another using storage. We’ll be seeing more integration services,” he says.

GELI’s system can control electric vehicles, solar, storage, diesel backups and mechanical systems, says Wartena. For example, one project will control lighting and mechanical systems during demand-side programs.

“We can ask the lighting system to dim a little to do demand-side management,” he says. “We can coordinate systems to maximize their value.”

Wartena sees many opportunities to better integrate resources and focus on the “Internet of Energy.”

“When I see a lot of cars on the road, I realize they are stationary 95 percent of the time. They have a generator in them that’s not providing value to the building where they are parked.” We need to focus more on being producers, rather than consumers, he adds.

“With the Internet of Energy, you are an interactive part. Everything is automated, from the TV to the Internet. You can put information or services back up, rather than just consuming.”

We’re not there yet, but it appears we’re moving toward prosumer-ism. Advances in software, like the work being done by GELI, make an Internet of Energy seems less and less futuristic; more within reach.

Article by Lisa Cohn. This article is published under a cross licensing agreement with EnergyEfficiencyMarkets.com

August 27, 2014 2 comments

Renewable Energy Storage Solutions Go Grid Scale

written by

The adoption of renewable energy on a large scale by utilities has been on hold, waiting for a breakthrough to solve the biggest problem for large-scale use: how to store energy produced by wind and solar power for those times when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine? Without the ability to store excess energy from variable renewable generators during peak production times, utilities have been unable to deploy them on a commercial, financially viable scale. Grid-sized batteries have been tried, but they are expensive and have a short life span.

Now, two new companies have come up with distinct innovations that might resolve this energy storage issue. SustainX uses a patented foamy material to maintain an even temperature for compressed-air storage of renewable energy. LightSail has developed water-cooled compressed air storage systems.

In a sign that these technologies may be answers to solving the renewable energy storage problem, the companies have attracted significant support. SustainX has received $43 million from the Department of Defense and the National Science Foundation, as well as funds from venture capital firms Polaris Partners and RockPort. LightSail has raised $42 million from Bill Gates and other investors. So promising are these tech innovations that the industry’s revenue is projected to rise from $37 million last year to $1.6 billion by 2016. That’s a powerful bottom line argument for power sourced from renewable energy.

Article by John Howell, appearing courtesy 3BL Media.

June 13, 2014 1 comment

New Battery Technology Could Offer Cheap Renewable Energy Storage

written by Yale Environment 360

New battery technology that uses cheaper and safer materials to store large amounts of energy may soon enable utility companies to use more renewable power, according to MIT Technology Review.

The new device is a type of flow battery, and it uses liquid materials that rely on iron-chromium chemical reactions to store energy. California-based startup Enervault, developer of the new battery, figured out how to use materials that had been tried in batteries decades ago; Enervault overcame a key technical challenge that had caused the earlier batteries to quickly degrade.

The new battery is large — it can store one megawatt-hour of electricity, or enough to run 10,000 100-watt light bulbs for an hour — and the materials last more than 20 years, according to its developer. Although the battery is inefficient compared to conventional batteries — it loses 30 percent of the energy used to charge it — it is still economically viable, the company says. The iron-chromium flow battery costs 80 percent less than vanadium flow batteries, a competing technology. The batteries are currently in use at a small power plant near Modesto, California.

June 2, 2014 0 comment

California Pairs Solar and Storage

written by The Vote Solar Initiative

We get very excited about the idea of a next-generation approach to power markets that takes full advantage of the suite of clean energy technologies available (what can we say, we’re electricity geeks). We want solar and renewables to work with storage, demand response, conservation and smart grid to repower our system with affordable, reliable, low-carbon electricity. Last Thursday, we took one step closer to that vision in California.

The California Public Utilities Commission issued a decision that will make it significantly easier for energy customers to pair their solar system with an energy storage device. In its Final Decision in the Net Energy Metering Paired Storage proceeding, the Commission decided to allow solar customers who add energy storage to continue to qualify for the standard net metering program, and exempting these customers from burdensome interconnection fees, standby charges and metering requirements. Responding to recommendations from Vote Solar and other parties, the Commission also required utilities to refund customers who were inappropriately charged these fees over the past year. Put this down as a win for California energy customers and a cleaner grid!

Under the newly adopted rules, customers with energy storage devices 10 kW or smaller will not be required to size the storage to meet either their maximum load or the maximum solar output. Furthermore, these customers, which includes a significant number of residential and some smaller commercial customers, are now exempt from having to install costly and unnecessary utility-grade meters and can instead rely on the estimated output. The Commission will issue a separate ruling to determine the precise method for making estimates, but customers with paired storage can still qualify to participate in the net metering program now.

Customers who install energy storage devices larger than 10 kW must limit their storage system size to no more than 150% of the maximum output of their solar system. These customers must also install more accurate meters, subject to a $600 cost cap for all but the most complex metering configurations. Anyone who installs larger storage devices with output greater than the 150% limit qualifies under the existing net metering Multiple Tariff schedules, which exposes them to additional costs and potential distribution system upgrades.

The decision is a significant milestone for both solar energy and energy storage. Prior to the decision, utilities have interpreted language from a recent update to the California Energy Commission (CEC) Renewables Portfolio Standard Eligibility Guidebook in a way that made it difficult and expensive for solar owners to add storage under the standard net metering tariff. The Commission’s decision clears away those unfair roadblocks and opens the door to a new era for clean energy supporters.

Storage paired with solar addresses many of the concerns utilities have about the intermittency of PV and allows solar customers to provide more value to the grid. For example, a solar customer can store clean energy produced during the daytime and discharge it to the grid in the evening when most people are coming home, turning on their air conditioners and driving up demand for energy. It’s a pretty simple concept, but a real game-changer for clean energy.

May 23, 2014 0 comment

Which is Better – Wind Energy or Concentrated Solar Power?

written by 2GreenEnergy

A reader asks for my viewpoint on wind energy and concentrated solar power (CSP). She writes: Hello! I have been doing a lot of research on CSP and wind power. I want to know your opinion on which is better and why. Thank you.

It’s hard to answer this question definitively in either direction, so let me present some pros and cons.

Wind is extremely inexpensive; we’re signing wind deals at $0.02/kWh. But:

It’s variable, and it’s available most when we need it the least (in the middle of the night). This means that we’ll eventually need energy storage if we’re going to integrate it much further into our grid mix (it’s currently a bit over 4%).

It takes up huge amounts of space, though farmers, i.e., growers of food animals and vegetables, can use most of their land in the way they always have.

Most people consider it ugly, and it’s a danger to birds and bats.

It’s often sited far from population centers, necessitating expensive, and unattractive transmission lines.

CSP, aka solar thermal (pictured above), on the other hand, is currently far more expensive. However, because the technology is nowhere near the same level of maturity as wind (or solar PV), it’s quite likely that the costs will come way down over time, if we don’t abandon it. CSP also faces many of the same problems discussed above: it’s variable, and it’s normally sited far from our cities. It also requires significant amounts of water, which are generally not available at the best sites for CSP , i.e., the deserts. But because the energy from CSP is heat, and heat energy can be stored far less expensively than electricity, CSP has an inherent advantage in that respect.

Another issue: wind lends itself to small and mid-sized projects and well as the utility scale wind farms we see around us; mid-sized wind can be used my schools, military bases, remote communities, etc. The same cannot be said for CSP, where plants, to be cost-effective, need to be large.

April 9, 2014 0 comment

New Process Turns Tree Cellulose into Building Block for Supercapacitors

written by Environmental News Network

Scientists at Oregon State University have found a way to convert tree cellulose into high-tech energy storage devices. Because cellulose is a key component of trees and the most abundant organic polymer on earth this discovery will have a profound impact in industry. Scientists were able to heat the tree cellulose in a furnace in the presence of ammonia to create the building block for supercapacitors for use in industrial electronic applications. Supercapacitors are extraordinarily, high-power energy devices for which production has been held back by cost and difficulty in producing high-quality carbon electrodes.

The new approach just discovered at OSU can produce nitrogen-doped, nanoporous carbon membranes — the electrodes of a supercapacitor — at low cost, quickly, in an environmentally benign process. The only byproduct is methane, which could be used immediately as a fuel or for other purposes.

“The ease, speed and potential of this process is really exciting,” said Xiulei (David) Ji, an assistant professor of chemistry in the OSU College of Science, and lead author on a study announcing the discovery in Nano Letters, a journal of the American Chemical Society.

“For the first time we’ve proven that you can react cellulose with ammonia and create these N-doped nanoporous carbon membranes,” Ji said. “It’s surprising that such a basic reaction was not reported before. Not only are there industrial applications, but this opens a whole new scientific area, studying reducing gas agents for carbon activation.

“We’re going to take cheap wood and turn it into a valuable high-tech product,” he said.

These carbon membranes at the nano-scale are extraordinarily thin — a single gram of them can have a surface area of nearly 2,000 square meters. That’s part of what makes them useful in supercapacitors. And the new process used to do this is a single-step reaction that’s fast and inexpensive. It starts with something about as simple as a cellulose filter paper — conceptually similar to the disposable paper filter in a coffee maker.

The exposure to high heat and ammonia converts the cellulose to a nanoporous carbon material needed for supercapacitors, and should enable them to be produced, in mass, more cheaply than before.

A supercapacitor is a type of energy storage device, but it can be recharged much faster than a battery and has a great deal more power. They are mostly used in any type of device where rapid power storage and short, but powerful energy release is needed.

What’s the Dark Side of Microgrids?

written by CleanTechies.com Contributor

Marc Lopata says his job is to uncover the dark side of microgrids.

And that’s just what the president and principal engineer for Microgrid Solar is doing in a project that combines energy storage and solar energy at Missouri University of Science and Technology (Missouri S&T).

The project is located at the “Solar Village,” which consists of multiple houses built by the university’s students, between 2002 to 2009, for competition in the U.S. Department of Energy’s Solar Decathlon.

Missouri S&T students, faculty and staff, along with members of the university’s microgrid advisory board (Ameren, City Utilities of Springfield, Rolla Municipal Utilities and Electric Power Research Institute), several Missouri manufacturers (Milbank and Ford) and the Army Corps of Engineers, have worked together for two years to design and implement an advanced microgrid testing facility at the village that aims to uncover solutions to common microgrid solar challenges.

While the facility, with its solar installations and energy storage units, has the ability to be completely independent of the grid, the project will also investigate the benefits of a number of on- and off-grid scenarios, he said.

For example, the project will look into when it makes sense to take advantage of time-of-use cost structures–a goal that will likely keep math-loving students busy.

“If the utility has a time-of-use tariff, we might use grid electricity during off-peak and during peak use the solar and battery power,” Lopata explained.

The project will also look at the challenges of microgrids.

“Part of my job is to look at the dark side of projects–what happens when things don’t go right,” he says.

For example, the project will seek to educate firefighters about what to do when there’s a fire at a microgrid facility.

“Firefighters don’t have an understanding of renewable energy systems and how they can affect their firefighting abilities,” says Lopata. “We see problems happening in various places with ordinary rooftop fire arrays. Firefighters don’t understand the risk, and sometimes refuse to respond to a fire where there’s a solar array. Microgrids don’t make that easier. Not only do they have to cut off the electricity, but they don’t know where the electricity sources are,” he explains.

For example, a firefighter might turn the power off in a building by removing the utility meter, but that might not turn off all the electrical systems. There could be storage or fuel cells that provide electricity. Not understanding those possibilities poses a risk to firefighters–a risk they need to understand.

Another microgrid challenge is maintaining reliability. “If you look at a utility coal-fired plant, they have a reliability of 80 percent. On the other hand, a solar array when the sun is shining has 99 percent reliability. It’s a lot more reliable. But when you put extra equipment and batteries and controls, it makes it more complicated,” he said.

As part of the project, a number of companies are testing the reliability of their equipment and refining it, he said. They include the battery manufacturer and a fuel cell manufacturer.

Lopata’s goals of looking at the dark side of microgrids is likely to uncover important information likely to help keep the lights on–at this solar village and elsewhere.

“The research that Missouri S&T and the university’s industry partners do with this versatile testing facility will help to pave the way for significant progress toward energy security and independence,” he said.

Article by Lisa Cohn, appearing courtesy Energy Efficiency Markets.

April 7, 2014 0 comment

GigaFactory Proves that Tesla is Ahead of the Clean Energy Curve, But Does Texas Stand to Benefit?

written by CleanTechies.com Contributor

Disruptive technologies tend to follow a certain trajectory. First, they are outliers, often ignored, and typically on the cusp of never entering the market. But, for the successful ones, a tipping point is ultimately reached, after which the technology goes viral and changes the status quo it was designed to replace. In the new energy revolution, Tesla is one such company that has surpassed the tipping point and threatens to change the way we produce, distribute, and consume electricity.

It isn’t just Tesla’s sleek and beautiful electric vehicles that will be key to disrupting the status quo. At a current price point of around $80,000, most people en masse won’t be able to afford a Tesla, even though the company has plans to develop more affordable models. But what makes Tesla unique, besides the strange genius of CEO Elon Musk, is the potential diversification of its offerings, highlighted recently by the company’s announcement to build the GigaFactory, a $5-billion battery factory that will employ 6,500 workers.

Set to open in about three years, the new GigaFactory will be large enough to manufacture more lithium-ion batteries than the entire industry produces now, and due to its sheer scale, is expected to reduce the cost of batteries by almost one-third.

Tesla batteries and renewables

Tesla’s move to build the largest battery factory in the world is significant for the electricity market – and not solely for the large-scale adoption of electric vehicles.

Energy storage is the missing link for realizing the full potential of renewable energy. Storage guarantees that the energy produced by renewables is available at all times, even when the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing. For example, storage can capture West Texas wind power at night when wind energy is most abundant and release that stored energy during the afternoon hours when demand for electricity is high.

But, to date, storage has been lagging in its availability and cost-competitiveness.

Worldwide, there were only 420 storage projects at the end of 2013 and only 34 megawatt hours’ worth of lithium ion battery projects built for the grid by the end of 2012. For comparison’s sake, there were 23 gigawatt hours’ worth of lithium ion batteries made for consumer electronics, like cell phones, over the same period (1 gigawatt is equal to 1,000 megawatts).

Tesla’s current costs for lithium ion batteries (supplied by Panasonic) are around $200 – $300 per kwh. If the factory could reduce those battery costs by 30 percent, prices could drop to $140 – $210 per kWh. Navigant analyst, Sam Jaffe estimates that battery packs will end up at around $180 per kWh. “They are definitely setting the bar for battery costs,” Jaffe said. “By 2020 every other battery manufacturer will have to get close to or beat the sub-$200 per kwh number that Tesla will be able to accomplish if they meet their goals.”

This is not to say that lithium ion batteries are the only option for energy storage- especially when it comes to renewables. A diverse portfolio of choices, including technologies like compressed air caverns and hydro pumping to sodium-sulfur batteries, will play an important role in the application of storage for both utility-scale and distributed generation energy storage.

Location, location, location

Tesla has not yet decided on a location for the GigaFactory, and many states are vying for the economic benefits of this development. The automaker is looking in Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Texas, but at least two of these states (Texas and Arizona) are at odds with the company over its direct-to-customer selling strategy.

Because of long-standing state laws protecting and regulating auto dealerships (and the lobbying power of the Automobile Dealers Association), Tesla cannot sell directly to consumers in these states, or New Jersey, the latest state to effectively ban Tesla under their current business model.

Instead, Tesla can only showcase vehicles at “galleries” and state law prohibits employees from discussing the price or any logistical aspect of acquiring the car. Prospective buyers must order the cars from California, which are “delivered in a truck with no company markings, per Texas law, and customers even have to unwrap their new automobiles themselves, because the law prohibits Tesla’s in-state representatives from doing, saying or touching anything related to selling or delivering cars.”

Ironically in a letter attempting to woo Tesla to the Lone Star State, Rep. Jason Villalba stated, “I can attest to you that there is no better state in the Union to begin, grow and expand a new and thriving business such as Tesla Motors.” Tesla begs to differ.

According to Diarmuid O’Connell, Tesla’s Vice President of Business Development, “The issue of where we do business is in some ways inextricably linked to where we sell our cars. If Texas wants to reconsider its position on Tesla selling directly in Texas, it certainly couldn’t hurt. In an interview in April with The Texas Tribune, Tesla CEO Elon Musk went as far to call the state’s auto franchise laws “very un-Texan.”

Too late for a Texas GigaFactory?

During the last Texas legislative session, House Bill 3351 introduced rules to allow manufacturers of 100 percent electric cars to sell directly to consumers, but it did not pass. Arizona is also lobbying aggressively for the factory and lawmakers are pushing legislation that would allow Tesla to sell direct. And automakers in Ohio just struck a deal with Tesla easing the battle over its direct-to-consumer retailing model. Governor Perry has voiced support for HB 3351 and went so far as to admit in a recent Fox Business Today interview that Texas needs to revisit its “antiquated rules” prohibiting Tesla from selling electric vehicles in the state.

Perhaps Texas legislators should reevaluate their principles for the upcoming legislative session. Waiting till next year may be too late to sweeten the deal for a Texas GigaFactory, although it does appear that Texas leaders are making moves behind closed doors to secure this project.

The Texas Tribune reported that a secret meeting took place on Wednesday, where Tesla executives met with leaders in San Antonio, causing further speculation about the lone star state’s chance of landing this coveted project. Either way, Texas leaders should act fast or risk losing the opportunity for thousands of jobs in Texas. As Tesla breaks down many barriers with its innovative products and business models, it will be met with resistance. But the agility of the company to overcome the odds has already been proven.

Article by Marita Mirzatuny, appearing courtesy EDF Blog.

March 31, 2014 0 comment

Smart Grid Concepts from the U.S. Department of Energy

written by Walter Wang

Here’s a video just posted on the ARPA-E (Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy) YouTube video channel, presenting a bit of information on the U.S. Department of Energy’s involvement in smart grid.

By design, it’s not very detailed; it covers a great

February 25, 2014 0 comment

Carbon Dioxide Takes on Geothermal Energy

written by Walter Wang

Geothermal energy originates from the original formation of the planet and from radioactive decay of minerals. In 2010, the United States led the world in geothermal electricity production with 3,086 MW of installed capacity from 77 power plants. Though geothermal power is cost effective, reliable, sustainable, and environmentally friendly, it has

December 16, 2013 0 comment

Optimizing Green Patent Protection: A Study in Energy Storage Service

written by Walter Wang

Stem is a Millbrae, California, startup that sells and leases its battery energy storage system, which is marketed as a way to reduce consumers’ energy bills. Specifically, the company makes a lithium-ion battery connected to analytics software that determines the best times to draw energy from the battery, thereby reducing electricity demand

December 6, 2013 0 comment

Newer Posts

Older Posts