Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

‘Reliable’ wind power: what cost battery storage?

By Geoff Carmody - posted Tuesday, 9 July 2024


The Tesla Hornsdale 'big battery' in South Australia is claimed to be able to discharge 194 MWh from fully charged to zero. For NEM storage, capacity of 65,223 – 130,447 Hornsdales would be needed just for seasonal storage and discharge (ignoring efficiency losses).

That's expensive. If, as claimed, a Hornsdale 'big battery' costs $90 million, and batteries last 20 years, the cost is (Australian dollars) $5,870,070 million (A$5.9 trillion). If the batteries only last 10 years, the cost is A$11,740,140 million (A$11.7 trillion).

Technology improvements and scale operations likely will cut unit energy storage costs a lot. Suppose such costs fall to an average of just 10% of the cost of the Hornsdale SA 'big battery'. At between A$0.6 trillion and A$1.2 trillion, seasonal battery storage is still very costly.

Advertisement

Before allowing for the extra costs of needed wind turbine capacity, and new specialised transmission capacity everywhere, such battery costs for the NEM under a 100% wind plus 100% batteries regime are still ruinous.

Either seasonal reliability is sacrificed, or customer costs soar even more. Or both.

I've not allowed for other incipient electricity demands, such as those driven by AI, cryptocurrencies, electric vehicles, 'green' production of various 'green' metals, electrolysed hydrogen, and the like. These would magnify renewables power supply problems.

I'm sceptical about 'distributed' renewables generation and transmission, and so-called 'demand response' (really a euphemism for power rationing). Who pays for all that, anyway?

Switching to a 'reliable' wind-only policy for the NEM is a major structural inflation driver with decades still to run. Australian living standards, inevitably, will fall more.

The economic realities of intermittent wind power, plus the growing demand for maintaining reliable electric power, will force consideration of alternatives.

Advertisement

Even if unit costs of storing energy in batteries fall to 10% of the Hornsdale 'big battery' cost, the total cost of investing in the reliability-required number of Hornsdale-equivalent energy storage units won't happen.

Wind power is less ruinous than solar. It's less intermittent, on average. It's still not nearly base-load reliable, however.

100% reliance on wind turbines and battery storage won't happen. Why?

At 10% of Hornsdale costs, battery costs would average half the dollar value of Australian GDP.

 

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

12 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Geoff Carmody is Director, Geoff Carmody & Associates, a former co-founder of Access Economics, and before that was a senior officer in the Commonwealth Treasury. He favours a national consumption-based climate policy, preferably using a carbon tax to put a price on carbon. He has prepared papers entitled Effective climate change policy: the seven Cs. Paper #1: Some design principles for evaluating greenhouse gas abatement policies. Paper #2: Implementing design principles for effective climate change policy. Paper #3: ETS or carbon tax?

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Geoff Carmody

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 12 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy