Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumSouthern California Edison wants its new, huge 770 MW battery storage procurement online fast
Dispatchable wind and solar?
Southern California Edison wants its new, huge 770 MW battery storage procurement online fast
In an era of plunging battery costs, these awards point to the end of intermittent renewables and the dawn of dispatchable solar and wind.
Southern California Edison (SCE) signed seven contracts for a total of 770 megawatts of lithium-ion battery-based energy storage to enhance the regional grids reliability and replace four large coastal once-through cooling plants.
Its one of the nations largest energy storage procurements and an indication of utility acceptance of massive-scale battery storage. Late last year, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) urged Californias power providers and community choice aggregators to procure 3.3 GW of storage and PV-plus-storage systems to solve grid congestion and to compensate for gas and coal plant retirements.
Remarkably, SCE wants these energy storage resources online by August 2021, an aggressive timeline unthinkable for any type of fossil fuel project of this size.
Most of the winning storage projects are co-located with nearby solar power plants to charge the battery over the term of the contract, help integrate renewable energy into the grid, and furnish resource adequacy during peak demand.
In an era of plunging battery costs, these awards point to the end of intermittent renewables and the dawn of dispatchable solar and wind.
Can someone help me understand what this is?
replace four large coastal once-through cooling plants
Edited to add link:
https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2020/05/02/southern-california-edison-wants-huge-770-mw-battery-storage-procurement-online-fast/?utm_source=pv+magazine+USA&utm_campaign=c54963e4aa-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_80e0d17bb8-c54963e4aa-140219173
hunter
(38,312 posts)captain queeg
(10,198 posts)I dont know about that once thru cooling statement. Maybe some thermal plants on the coast that are using cooling water could be replaced? Doesnt sound like anything I can come up with.
hunter
(38,312 posts)The older OTC plants were typically oil fueled power plants converted to gas. The state document this article is based on says these older plants now run only 10% of the time.
units have been well under 10 percent, thus minimizing the marine environment
impact of these facilities, since they are not actually running and using sea water
for cooling the vast majority of the time.11 This also minimizes GHG emissions
from these facilities. The state has also made a great deal of progress in the past
decade retiring OTC units from service. We expect to continue that progress,
with this timing adjustment to ensure system reliability.
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M319/K337/319337006.PDF
Newer combined cycle gas plants in California rely on evaporative air cooling. Some of these plants can also switch to dry air cooling whenever there are shortages of fresh water, albeit at less efficiency.
Finishline42
(1,091 posts)You answered my questions as well.
The time element is merely a matter of how the batteries are used.
Additionally software is being developed to predict cloud cover over solar farms so having batteries could bridge gaps during partly cloudy days.
From reading about the batteries Tesla installed in Australia there was $millions saved because they were able to deal with grid issues not only cheaper but much quicker.
Solar deals with one of two peak periods of the day. Mid-afternoon is when solar peaks but of course they drop off late afternoon into early evening when AC usage is highest. Batteries help to deal with that 2nd peak.
Turbineguy
(37,331 posts)770 MW replaces a just over 1 million HP steam plant.
Turbineguy
(37,331 posts)is using seawater (or river or lake) as a coolant to condense the steam exhausting from the turbines. The heat is directly transferred to the ocean and "lost" (Yes we accept the First Law, but as far as economical plant operation goes, the energy is lost).
Heat loss by condensation is the greatest heat loss in a steam plant because it is latent and since it occurs at such a low temperature that little heat can be recovered. Because the condensers operate in a vacuum, the turbine exhaust temperature is quite low, on the order of 105 deg F or so. As long as the steam is in a dry-vapor state the turbine can extract power from it. One of the problems is the increase in volume to the point where choking occurs in the exhaust duct. So that is a limitation as well.
In steam plants, one way to reduce heat loss is to extract steam at various points in the turbines to transfer heat to the water side of the cycle through boiler feed water heating. Because the steam is condensed in the feed heater, sensible as well as latent (the biggie) heat is transferred. Essentially we are cheating the condenser by doing this.
Ideally a boiler should just add latent heat to change feedwater into steam and superheat for extra energy.
The turbine operates by exchanging steam pressure and temperature for velocity through the rows of turbine blades. The weight and velocity of the steam imparts the rotating motion. As the pressure and temperature drop, the volume increases. The turbine design increases blade length in the stages to make room. We can also take steam off the turbine and reheat it to increase energy available in later stages.
Finishline42
(1,091 posts)So it's 4 power plants that the batteries are replacing?
Once through is less efficient because of the heat loss? But an environmental requirement to reduce the impact on the where the cooling water is dumped?
Turbineguy
(37,331 posts)One electric plant could heat all the swimming pools in Los Angeles using the cooling water. But the piping would be impossible.
Finishline42
(1,091 posts)Radiant heat is the best.