Pumped Hydro Energy Storage better than Batteries.
Pumped hydro is most the cost effective solution for large scale electricity storage
Here are some bullet points from a recent report by an Energy task force commissioned by the New South Wales government.
Everything here has been out in the public domain for years, decades even.
For how many readers is this new or unfamiliar information?
(See the discussion of 'social license' below.)
Energy storage is likely to play a key role in the future energy system and technology is advancing rapidly. Storage technologies can play a number of different roles in the system depending on the type – including providing grid security services, peak demand
management, and firming intermittent generation sources.
- It's unlikely that a single technology or category of energy storage will dominate.
- Different storage technologies are best suited for different functions.
- Where geology and water availability permit, large-scale energy storage by pumped hydro is most cost effective for delivering energy reliability.
- Pumped hydro systems do not have to interreupt or dam existing rivers. It re-uses it's water in a closed loop.
- Today Pumped Hydro Energy Storage (PHES) accounts for 97% of energy storage worldwide.
- One study identified over 22,000 potential PHES sites in Australia, with 8,578 potential sites in NSW, amounting to a combined storage capacity of approximately 29,000 GWh.
Dis-advantages of batteries.
- Higher cost.
- There are a number of environmental impact issues with Lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries such as obtaining raw materials (including rare earth minerals), manufacturing, transporting, operation and disposal.
- Sensitivity to heat - higher temperatures reduce efficiency and increase wear.
Final report from the Energy Security Taskforce
NSW Chief Scientist & Engineer, 19 December 2017
-- http://www.chiefscientist.nsw.gov.au/re ... -taskforce
AEMO - Australian Energy Market Operator
NSW - New South Wales, Australia
Energy storage is likely to play a key role in the future energy system and technology is advancing rapidly. Storage technologies can play a number of different roles in the system depending on the type – including providing grid security services, peak demand management, and firming intermittent generation sources.
There is unlikely to be a single technology or category of energy storage that dominates the market, as different technologies are best suited for different functions (Godfrey, Dowling, Forsyth, Grafton, & Wyld, 2017).
The Australian Council of Learned Academies (Godfrey et al., 2017) reported that “Battery systems are the most cost effective when stabilising the grid, provided they have a ‘fast frequency response’ capability through appropriate power electronics to synthesise the fast frequency response, and are ready for immediate discharge when required. By comparison, where geology and water availability permit, large-scale energy storage by pumped hydro is most cost effective for delivering energy reliability”.
Types of energy storage are usually broken down according to their method of energy storage (Luo, Wang, Dooner, & Clarke, 2015; Aneke & Wang, 2016):
• mechanical (such as pumped hydro or flywheel energy storage)
• electrochemical (such as conventional, rechargeable lead acid or lithium-ion
• electrical (such as capacitors)
• chemical (such as hydrogen fuel cells)
• thermal (heat storage, such as molten salts)
• geothermal reservoirs
• thermochemical (solar fuels).
This section primarily discusses batteries and pumped hydro and their potential for the NSW electricity system ...
3.3.2 Pumped hydro energy storage
Pumped hydro energy storage (PHES) increasingly has potential in Australia to act as an effective electrical energy storage technology as an alternative to, or in conjunction with, batteries. PHES can contribute to both reliability and security of the grid, as it can provide the system security services associated with synchronous generation. Energy is stored when prices are low, such as from solar or wind energy, or overnight coal generation. During this time, water is pumped to the higher of two reservoirs and stored, then released when energy is needed.
PHES accounts for 97% of energy storage worldwide (Blakers, Lu, & Stocks, 2017a). Recent investment internationally has been in response to increased renewable generation as a flexible means to build reliability into electricity markets (Barbour, Wilson, Radcliffe, Ding, and Li (2016). In 2016, Japan had the largest PHES capacity at ~25 GW, followed by China at ~23 GW (Barbour et al., 2016). Europe currently has a combined installed PHES capacity of ~33 GW, with the largest proportion in Germany.
No large-scale PHES facilities have been constructed in Australia in the past 30 years (Godfrey et al., 2017). However, recently the Commonwealth Government announced a feasibility study to develop 2 GW of PHES through extension of Snowy Mountains Scheme. Further, ARENA has also recently funded a feasibility study for a coastal PHES project in South Australia that utilises the ocean as the lower reservoir. Also, construction of the Kidston PHES project in northern Queensland utilising a disused gold mine is due to commence shortly.
A study led by Andrew Blakers at the Australian National University identified over 22,000 potential PHES sites in Australia, with 8,578 potential sites in NSW, amounting to a combined storage capacity of approximately 29,000 GWh (Blakers, Stocks, Lu, Anderson, & Nadolny, 2017b). This assessment excluded national parks and protected land. Blakers et al. (2017b) also noted that the sites were often close to the transmission grid. Maps showing the locations of these potential sites are available (Blakers et al., 2017b).
Site selection for pumped hydro facilities requires multiple criteria to be considered with topography, climatic conditions and proximity to the grid being the main limiting factors. This is followed by water availability, wider environmental factors and ‘social license’. As described by Godfrey et al. (2017), “land use and water requirements for PHES have the potential to negatively influence the social license for the technology if environmental and water use impacts are not appropriately managed”.
In anticipation of proposals coming forward for new PHES developments, the Government should prepare for how it would manage approvals for this type of generation infrastructure in the NSW landscape through the planning system and what environmental approvals would be required. This could include developing guidelines for proponents, which could be similar to those developed for solar and wind developments (e.g. the Wind Energy Guideline by NSW DPE).
That the Government do pre-work on environmental permissions for likely new styles of energy infrastructure, for example pumped hydro, in order to facilitate the smooth adoption and development of appropriate energy technologies.