A new Canberra-based storage trial will examine whether lithium-ion batteries could enhance electricity grids and increase the use of renewable energy. Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) CEO Ivor Frischknecht said IT Power (ITP) would carry out the trial, supported by $450,000 of ARENA funding. “ITP will analyse the performance of six major lithium-ion battery brands, comparing them to existing and advanced lead-acid battery technologies to investigate how they could operate in large and small electricity grids,” Mr Frischknecht said. “Storage is important for allowing more renewable energy to be used in Australia on-grid and off-grid by smoothing out energy supply. “Power companies could, for example, consider renewable energy based mini-grids with storage as an alternative to maintaining sections of the main grid that currently run at a loss.” Mr Frischknecht said the testing in a controlled environment would result in a greater understanding of various storage technologies and how they can best be adopted as they begin to compete with lead-acid batteries on cost and reliability. “Lithium-ion batteries are increasingly used in electric vehicles and consumer electronics, giving them great potential for future cost reductions compared to other storage technologies,” Mr Frischknecht said. “ITP is building a test facility at the Canberra Institute of Technology to put each battery through its paces with repeated charge and discharge cycles simulating real-world applications and Australian environmental conditions. “The findings will be shared broadly across the energy industry with investors, power companies and researchers in line with ARENA’s commitment to knowledge sharing. ITP Managing Director Simon Troman said conventional battery storage had been used to optimise the design of remote power systems for many years. “Recent reductions in the cost of lithium-ion batteries coupled with potentially significant performance advantages warrant serious testing of this new storage option,” Mr Troman said. The trial will proceed for three years and is scheduled for completion in June 2018. About IT Power The IT Power Group, formed in 1981, is a specialist renewable energy and energy efficiency consulting company. The group has offices and projects throughout the world, and has been at the forefront of renewable energy development for more than 30 years. IIT Power (Australia) Pty Limited (ITP) was established in 2003 and has undertaken a wide range of projects, including designing grid-connected renewable power systems, providing advice for government policy, feasibility studies for large, off-grid power systems, developing micro-finance models for community-owned power systems in developing countries and modelling large-scale power systems for industrial use. Project profileTesting the performance of lithium ion batteries ARENA Media contactsJames Webber – 0410 028 899 Judith Ion – 0434 169 037 media@arena.gov.au This article has been sourced from http://arena.gov.au/media
1 Comment
CSIRO is set to increase confidence in large scale solar by more accurately predicting how different solar photovoltaic (PV) systems will perform on Australian shores.
Over the course of a 32 month project supported by $1.3 million ARENA funding, CSIRO successfully established unique indoor and outdoor testing capabilities that are now accessible to PV researchers and industry. ARENA CEO Ivor Frischknecht said these new facilities would allow different solar panels and cells to be scrutinised, assessing how they respond to Australian conditions and predicting their output over time. “Accurately predicting the energy output of a solar PV power plant is critical throughout its life cycle, from forecasting future revenue and determining commercial viability to day-to-day operation on the electricity grid,” Mr Frischknecht said. “Effective forecasting is particularly important for investor confidence and risk mitigation as the cost of new plants is mostly up-front. “A manufacturer’s solar panel power rating comes from a standardised laboratory measurement that doesn’t represent how well it will perform under Australian conditions. “Knowing how the panels should perform allows solar PV system design to be assessed, and the quality, health and degradation of systems to be tracked over time.” Mr Frischknecht said researchers and industry would be able to access CSIRO’s accredited indoor laboratory to independently measure solar cell efficiency against international standards. “This capability was previously only available at selected PV laboratories in the Northern Hemisphere, making it an important new piece of research infrastructure for the Southern Hemisphere,” Mr Frischknecht said. “To complement this, the outdoor section of the facility includes the most advanced solar ground measurement station of its type in Australia to measure the impact of different weather conditions and solar radiation levels. “These notable achievements will further Australia’s enviable position in solar PV research and strengthen the case for utility scale solar PV plants and rooftop installations.” The results and final report for the $3.2 million project are now available on the project page on ARENA’s website. About CSIRO CSIRO, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, is Australia’s national science agency and one of the largest and most diverse research agencies in the world. Its role is to deliver great science and innovative solutions for industry, society and the environment. ARENA Media contacts James Webber – 0410 028 899 Judith Ion – 0434 169 037 media@arena.gov.au This article is sourced from http://arena.gov.au/media/new-laboratory-to-increase-confidence-in-solar Department of the Environment, 2015 The Emissions Reduction Fund - what it means for you How Australian businesses and the community can benefit from the Emissions Reduction Fund Download
Is the Emissions Reduction Fund for your business?If you are thinking about investing in new technology to improve the productivity or energy efficiency of your business operations, you may be interested in the Emissions Reduction Fund. The Emissions Reduction Fund creates a positive incentive for Australian businesses to adopt smarter practices to cut the amount of greenhouse gases they create. The Emissions Reduction Fund has been designed to reduce Australia’s emissions while lowering your energy costs—and your customers’. An opportunity to reduce Australia’s greenhouse gas emissionsThe Australian Government’s Emissions Reduction Fund presents new opportunities for Australian businesses to reduce their emissions. Positive, direct action by the Australian Government, businesses and the community will allow us to meet our emissions reduction target of five per cent below 2000 levels by 2020. We will achieve this through the Emissions Reduction Fund and other measures under the ‘Plan for a Cleaner Environment’, such as support for the uptake of renewable energy and energy efficiency standards on appliances, equipment and buildings. Further information This article is sourced from http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change 2015 is surely bringing in the age of hybrid solar. What is Hybrid Solar and What are its Costs?Hybrid solar is a typical pv system with the addition of batteries, often used to store excess power so that it can be used to offset peak load or night time use. It is generally not intended to take a household ‘off grid,’ however in many cases it has the capability to do so. To understand this in more detail lets look at some terminology. Solar PV Solar PV refers to the panels on your roof which are then ‘tied’ or ‘coupled’ to an inversion system on the ground. A ‘grid tie solar PV’ system is the technical term for your typical domestic or commercial solar system and is commonly made up of panels and a single inverter. These days it is also possible to purchase an AC solar system using micro inverters. AC Coupled Hybrid This refers to a standard grid tie system ‘coupled’ to a hybrid inverter, which then charges batteries and outputs to the home and/or grid. We expect this type of system to become extremely popular, as it will be a great way to upgrade from existing PV and it is also extremely cost effective as a new install. DC Coupled Hybrid This is where we run the solar PV into a regulator, which also acts as a battery charger. This then connects directly to the batteries, which are then connected to the hybrid inverter. This is your typical structure for a full off grid system. So now that we’re all on the same page where to from here? What is the right system for you? Which batteries should you use? Is it cost effective and why install hybrid? For most people the common scenario is going to be an AC coupled system using a standard inverter, running into a hybrid unit such as the Schneider Conext XW+. A system like this can be selected as an add on, and allows for complete off grid functionality at a later date. There are a number of design considerations to look at when selecting a hybrid system. These can have a dramatic effect on operation so should be considered closely. 1 Peak Draw This is the highest amount of power one expects to draw at any one point in time usually measured in kW or watts, but sometimes in amps. Since peak is a limiting factor in any hybrid or off grid installation it makes sense to ‘load shift’ devices, so that they’re not all on at once. For example one may tell the hot water system to heat, followed by the swimming pool to clean – all outside of peak (ie cooking hours). It may also be beneficial to change appliances such as stoves to gas, and it will certainly make sense to change lighting to LED. In saying that the latest XW+ can deliver a sustained load of 28A and handle a peak of 50A for up to 60 seconds and 35A for up to 30 minutes. This will handle the average home and for larger installations they can be chained together in bundles of up to 110kW three phase – enough to power a small community! 2 Storage Capacity It is important to look at storage not just in terms of peak over night use, but also in terms of ‘days of autonomy.’ This refers to the number of days one expects to be without sun and usually varies between 2-4 days. Storage is generally measured in amp hours, but can easily be converted to kWhrs by multiplying amp hours by the battery bank voltage. For example a 200AH battery at 12V gives 2.4kWhrs of storage. 3 Depth of Discharge and Battery Life There are a lot of battery technologies available on the market with massive differences in performance and price. It is important to consider firstly the application of the system and then also its requirements in terms of discharge and life cycle. If one is designing a backup system which will be rarely used, then ‘number of cycle’s’ becomes less important, as the system is only intended to take infrequent shallow discharges. This may be suitable as a gate opener, or for a holiday home, and is commonly used in telecommunications systems as secondary backup. For the home or business however, the batteries will be discharged on a daily basis and it therefore becomes important to consider how many times this can occur before the batteries will begin losing capacity, or fail all together. Finally one needs to consider the rate of discharge and any environment factors such as physical space, temperature and weight. We will write another blog on batteries later, but in short the selection is best left to a very qualified and experienced professional. What are the costs of Hybrid Solar?OK lets look at a typical Australian home using 25kWhr per day with roughly 6-8kWhr of that at night. This home has the following features; 1 Electric storage hot water 2 Electric oven 3 Gas hot plates 4 Ceiling fans in every room used often 5 Intermittent AC used only during the day 6 Fully featured AV and computers 7 Swimming pool The first trick is to ensure that the electric hot water and swimming pool are set to run during the day. This allows us to put up more highly cost effective solar PV, and at the same time reduce our battery capacity. We then use these appliances as a ‘dump load’ for excess PV generation meaning that we dont ‘export,’ as the power is either used, or ‘dumped’ into appliances. This allows us to factor all production against the tariff rate of 30c per kWhr INC GST. Please note that all figures are inclusive of GST as the system price is inclusive of GST. There is no need for night tariff’s as the dump loads are allocated against PV, which has an installed cost of around 7c per kWhr. The next trick is to maximize PV capacity to ensure that even on cloudy days we are still generating ample amounts of power. For some people this wont be possible due to a lack of roof space, however once all roof faces are considered most homes can fit the required 7-10kW of panels. To ensure that we have enough generation, the minimum is 1kW of panels installed for every 1kWhr of storage. This is a rough guide and depends on day time usage. Next we shift loads where we can such as the hot water and swimming pools to reduce the peak demand. This minimises the hybrid inverter size and once again reduces costs. Hybrid Solar Costs – The End Result The home in our example will run their AC off mains power, which makes this a ‘hybrid’ rather than ‘off grid’ solution. If they wanted to run electric hot plates and AC that would be possible, but it would also incur significant additional costs. The rest of the home will run comfortably off PV and batteries some 360 days of the year with the remaining 5 darkest of days drawing some power from the grid. Once again for full autonomy one could increase the battery size, however this once again significantly increase initial outlay. Therefore the most cost effective method is to operate hybrid solar, which would give us total system costs of around 30K giving a payback period of 9 years and an ROI of about 9% p.a. It’s important to remember that the life cycle of the system is 10 years, meaning that the purchase is for 10 years worth of electricity resulting in one year for free – when compared against grid costs. It is also worth remembering that we have assumed electricity prices will remain the same. If electricity prices rise then the final result will be far more beneficial. Furthermore at the 10 year mark the batteries will need to be replaced, however the panels will continue producing for up to 25 years resulting in a second investment cycle with much higher returns. Article sourced from http://reneweconomy.com.au/ The rule-maker for Australian electricity markets has finally released proposed changes that would encourage demand management schemes such as energy efficiency and battery storage to be adopted by network operators, but it may come too late to head off another major spree of expensive grid upgrades in the meantime. The Australian Energy Market Commission, which sets policy for the electricity markets, has released draft rules that it says will encourage network operators to find the lower cost solutions to managing their systems. You’d think the network operators would be doing that anyway, but the nature of the regulatory system has encouraged networks to build bigger grids becaue the more assets they own, the higher the regulated returns. This has led to some absurd situations where even remote towns are serviced by the traditional poles and wires, where a renewable-based local micro grid might be a much cheaper and more efficient option, not to mention cleaner. This has led to accusations that one third of the $45 billion grid expenditure allowed in the last five year period might not have been necessary. Those costs have been the biggest cause of soaring electricity bills throughout the country. The changes, however, have been a long time coming, and further delays may mean that it misses the next regulatory period altogether. The AEMC first identified the problem in 2012, but has taken three years to come up with a draft proposal. It does not expect it to be finalised until Decevember, 2016, after the next five year regulatory periods and expenditures are set. “That is not good enough,” said Chris Dunstan, from the Institute of Sustainable Future, a critic of excess expenditure on the network. Dunstan wrote in March that the AEMC itself has estimated that “Demand management” – where a power company invests in helping consumers save energy or reduce demand, rather than building more capacity in the form of power stations, power lines and substations – could save consumers between A$4 billion and A$12 billion, or cuts to annual household bills of up to $500. Dunstan said failure to act would likely cause fixed charges for network services to rise, and variable charges for energy to fall, creating another distortion in the market. “There will be fewer incentives to support energy efficiency, peak load management and local generation,” he wrote at the time. “This will give consumers less control over their energy bills and make energy efficiency, solar panels and batteries less attractive. “It will lock Australia into an outmoded, centralised model of electricity generation, at a time when technology and market trends all point towards more decentralised energy.” The Total Environment Centre, the consumer advocacy group that has pushed the changes, says it was happy with the proposals, but concerned about the potential delays, and the fact that it could miss the next regulatory re-set. Energy markets advocate Mark Byrne said the TEC is happy that the Australian Energy Regulator, which sets the revenue allowances for the networks, will be required to design a demand management incentive scheme (DMIS) and a separate innovation allowance (DMIA) mechanism. He said it was the first time a consumer group has got largely what it asked for in a rule change request. But the TEC still has concerns about the amount of discretion at the AER’s disposal, and the fact that the AER will not be required to publish the new scheme until December 2016. That suggested that it won’t be implemented until the next round of revenue determinations in 2019, even though the AER flagged possible transitional rules in its NSW draft determination. “When eventually implemented this reform should create a significantly greater incentive for networks to invest in demand management rather than capex,” Byrne said. “But the AER’s discretion and the long timeframe could mean it’s a case of “Lord, give me demand management, but not yet…” This article is sourced from reneweconomy.com.au
Why China is becoming a renewables super power, and the West is not By John Mathews on 29 May 2015 Why is China becoming a renewable energy superpower – even as it becomes the world’s largest carbon emitter? This is surely one of the more interesting and challenging questions in international political economy and has been taken further in a recent SPERI Comment posted by Matthew Paterson. The issue of renewables is burdened in the West by expectations of lower carbon emissions. The advance of clean technology is viewed as the front line in dealing with global warming and has been characterised by leading economists like Lord Stern as the great moral challenge of our time. But renewables play on a broader stage than decarbonisation. Seen from the perspective of China, renewables promise energy security and avoidance of geopolitical tension, as well as immediate relief from particulate pollution from the burning of coal that is making the air of cities like Beijing unbreathable. Seen from the perspective of Beijing, renewables promise a pathway to energy generation, utilising the products of manufacturing – wind turbines, solar cells – rather than (or in addition to) resorting to fossil fuels with all the geopolitical complications of sourcing them from places like Sudan, Nigeria, Iran or Venezuela. By contrast with the civil wars, revolution and terror triggered by these fossil-fuel bonanzas that China could help foment with a ‘business as usual’ (that is, fossil-fuelled) pathway, renewables offer a source of energy security that is bounded only by manufacturing capacity and technological development. This is the argument advanced in my book Greening of Capitalism, reviewed so sympathetically by Patterson, and in the article that Hao Tan and I published in Nature in September 2014. In responding to Patterson I wish to broaden the argument. Renewables are burdened by this idea that they are essential to the fight against global warming, and that this is a moral challenge that the West has created and to which it must respond in the first instance. Such an argument enables the newly industrialising giants like China to escape primary responsibility for the threat of warming – but ignores the real reasons that China is actively pursuing renewables, as well as resource efficiency, via the Circular Economy. The essential feature of renewables is that they are products of manufacturing and, as such, are limited only by the build-up of manufacturing capacity and the resources needed to feed that capacity. The more that countries adopt an approach to resources that places highest priority on their recirculation (as China is doing through its prime developmental goal of creating the Circular Economy), the more the resource limitations on manufacturing fall away. Building renewables systems and the energy security they promise then becomes more and more a matter of building manufacturing capacity. It becomes an economic imperative. Generalising this argument so that it applies to the West as well as to industrialising giants like China, we might say that greening strategies can be founded on manufacturing activities devoted to producing energy conversion devices and that policy should preferably be directed towards promoting such activities, as well as resource recirculation. It is then a highly convenient truth that, as energy security is enhanced through building renewables, so carbon emissions are reduced. Such a strategy can be pursued in the name of energy abundance and resource security – very different goals from the usual appeals to restrictions on energy and resource consumption. There is in fact no need for the West to reduce energy consumption – provided the energy is generated from renewable sources. And there is no need for the West to seek to reduce resource consumption – again, provided the resources are recirculated. These are both simple yet profound goals and imply simple yet profound changes to capitalism. They are simple in that they can be expressed in a formula: ‘resource security and energy abundance’. But following through on the policies needed to effect such an approach would imply a commitment to industrial strategy that is decidedly unfashionable in the twilight of the neoclassical era. It is for this reason that I argued in Greening of Capitalism that Asia (and in particular China) is taking the lead in driving this next ‘great transformation’. In the terms of a detective novel, China has both motive and means to build a new green growth system. It has abundant motives in the appalling pollution problems it has created through its three and more decades of unbridled growth. (These problems are reviewed in telling detail in the YouTube sensation ‘Under the Dome’ by Chinese journalist Chai Jing). And China has the means in the form of a strong state which is prepared to intervene in the economy to drive the promotion of the manufacturing industries that are producing green energy and resource devices. Unless Western countries are prepared to intervene in their own economies to build green energy and resource systems with the same determination as shown by China, they will continue to go down to defeat in international competition over the emergence of the clean-tech economy. In solar photovoltaic cells, for example, China now dominates global production of first-generation crystalline silicon solar cells – as is a common experience for an industrial latecomer utilising smart catch-up strategies. But second-generation thin film solar cells should be a different matter entirely, because there is as yet no dominant technology. In these circumstances smart industrial strategies in the West could set off a new technological trajectory where advanced companies could maintain a lead for years until China’s firms catch up through pursuing another round of industrial strategies. Capitalism is the vibrant technoeconomic system that enables such industrial dynamics to be pursued. There really is no secret as to why China is pursuing energy abundance and resource security through its highly targeted industrial strategies. The only mystery is why the West allows it to win in the competition unleashed in the international political economy. Changing the emphasis of policy so that it engages direct with the economy through industrial strategy, and changing the rationale for renewables to building energy security through their manufacture, would go a long way to restoring some balance. This article was originally published by the Sheffield Political Economy Research Institute. Reproduced with permission of the author. This article is sourced from reneweconomy.com.au
|
|