Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)
Sat Mar 30, 2019, 08:17 PM Mar 2019

Maui's largest solar project OK'd by PUC

http://www.mauinews.com/news/local-news/2019/03/mauis-largest-solar-project-okd-by-puc/
Maui’s largest solar project OK’d by PUC

Island’s other large-scale array, battery proposal awaits approval

Mar 30, 2019

Maui County’s largest solar project with battery storage, the 60-megawatt Kuihelani Solar, was approved by the state Public Utilities Commission, Hawaiian Electric Co. announced Tuesday.

AES Renewable Energy is developing the project to be built on as much as 500 acres of old sugar fields off Kuihelani Highway in Central Maui, the company said in November. It will include a 240-megawatt-hour battery storage system.

Maui Electric Co. will pay 8 cents a kilowatt hour for the power from the solar array and battery system, the lowest cost for renewable energy on the island and much lower than fossil-fuel-generated power.

“AES is excited about the PUC approval of its solar-plus-storage project in Central Maui, which is expected to provide enough clean energy for nearly 27,000 Maui homes per year, anticipated bill savings to Maui residents and offset nearly 2,000,000 barrels of fuel over the life of the contract,” said Rob Cooper, business development director of AES Renewable Energy, on Friday.

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

progree

(10,901 posts)
1. Interesting - the article mentioned 3 solar + battery projects, and all were 4 hours of storage
Sun Mar 31, 2019, 02:00 AM
Mar 2019

e.g. like in the OP, it's a 60 MW solar with 240 MWH battery storage -- meaning the battery can store 4 hours of the solar plant's full output (60 MW X 4 hours = 240 MWH).

I wonder what is magical about 4 hours? I've seen other articles where the battery is sized for 3 or 4 hours of storage at full capacity. I do realize that the battery can be discharged more slowly and last longer, e.g. half the MW capacity for 8 hours.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)
2. Here you go...
Sun Mar 31, 2019, 10:26 PM
Mar 2019
https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/68960.pdf
Timescales of Energy Storage Needed for Reducing Renewable Energy Curtailment



5 Conclusions



Our modeling shows that the amount of VG curtailed is a function of wind and PV generation patterns and the size of energy storage deployed. Overall, our results suggest that relatively short-duration energy storage might offer an effective path to integrating VG at penetrations up to 55%. Across all the mixes of wind and solar resources analyzed, at least half of the potential avoided-curtailment benefits are realized with 8 hours of storage, and the first 4 hours provide the largest benefit. A 4-hour duration also offers a relatively high capacity value, which is critical to the economics of storage. Cost improvements might make storage with durations of 6 or even 8 hours viable, but there appears to be little value in deploying very-long-duration or seasonal storage at VG penetrations up to 55%.

progree

(10,901 posts)
3. I'll have to study. I read the Exec Summary and stared at Figure ES-1b on p. vi for a long
Sun Mar 31, 2019, 10:43 PM
Mar 2019

while. Thanks very much, I think I will learn a lot from this.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)
4. You're Welcome!
Sun Mar 31, 2019, 10:48 PM
Mar 2019

The math isn’t new. I first saw it attached to concentrated thermal solar with storage.

progree

(10,901 posts)
5. I'm just surprised that their metric of effectiveness is the amount of avoided curtailment --
Mon Apr 1, 2019, 12:33 AM
Apr 2019

Last edited Mon Apr 1, 2019, 02:57 AM - Edit history (3)

i.e. dumping the wind when one already has enough other (usually thermal generation -- fossil, nuclear) on line but that can't be backed down further in order to take the wind because of their minimum loading constraint, and can't be shut down, because of operating constraints (minimum up time, minimum down time, and the high cost of a shutdown / startup cycle).

What worried me as a generation planner and system operation planner at an electric utility was meeting the load (total customer demand) at every hour, minute, and second of the day.

In other words I wasn't worried about the low load conditions when we had plenty online for the load conditions. We were worried about the morning and afternoon peaks. I don't know how a 4 hour battery helps much on a cloudy rainy day (solar) or calm wind day.

I get some of the "peaking" application -- as an Arizona utility described it, the solar did just fine in the early-mid afternoon, but in the late afternoon the sun is getting low in the sky and people are getting home from work and one has a peak when the factories and businesses haven't yet shut down and meanwhile the residential load is increasing ...

So that's when the 4 hours of battery power comes in handy, which, incidentally can be charged at night by any other generation that's online, wind, conventional, whatever....

But that seems kind of a limited application. And Arizona can count on sunshine during the days with high probability, not so many other places like Minnesota. So I'm hoping to get some insights reading the paper (and not just the executive summary )

Though the more I think about it, the more I like the idea of a 4 hour battery that can be charged at any time of the day or night, and then used during the 4 hours when it's most needed, which can be predicted in advance with a high degree of likelihood.

Or at half capacity for 8 hours. Or low capacity building up to full capacity and then tapering back down, all over several hours.

In other words, treat the battery as a total utility resource, not something that has to be operated as part of the solar farm to make the solar farm more useful. Operate both as separate entities in a way that is most useful to the system.

Back in my day at the utility (late 70's thru '92) was before wind and solar as a significant resource, but we did have deals with other utilities for non-firm energy that basically we couldn't really count on, but it's still -- if low cost -- useful to back down our more costly generation (search: equal incremental loading, incremental heat rate curve, incremental cost curve, power generator input output curve).

Somebody might object that a generator operating at say half capacity is not as efficient (on an overall MBTU/MWH basis or $/MWH basis) as one that is at full load, but still it's cheaper in dollars and consumes less fuel than operating it at some other higher load. (search: power generator input output curve, incremental cost curves).

Somebody might object that a battery wastes energy, but well, I can tell you that the cost of energy is several times higher during the daytime peak than at night (in my day it was like $30/Mwh during the day and $6 to $10/Mwh at night). So the issue of the "only" 80% round trip efficiency of a battery pales into insignificance compared to these kinds of cost spreads.

Thanks again

hunter

(38,309 posts)
6. Hawaii and the U.S. military bases in Hawaii are entirely dependent on imported fossil fuels...
Tue Apr 2, 2019, 06:35 PM
Apr 2019

... and those imports are controlled by a handful of people and agencies in a non-transparent way.

Hawaii's electricity, with little exception, is generated from oil. Their "natural" gas is synthesized from oil.

Even small diversions from "business as usual," such as Costco importing gasoline refined elsewhere, are seen as remarkable.

As in Texas, it seems "alternative" energy is no longer seen as a mortal threat to the fossil fuel industry, because it's not.

That's unfortunate.

The only way to quit fossil fuels is to quit fossil fuels.

A world economy that is two-thirds powered by fossil fuels, one third solar, wind, etc..., is in the long run just as deadly as a fully fossil fueled economy. Currently solar and wind power projects represent a commitment to the fossil fuel industry to provide "back-up" power.

But can it really be called back-up power when most of the energy derived from fossil fuels?

An economy powered entirely by renewable energy would look nothing like the high energy industrial economy many of us now enjoy.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Maui's largest solar proj...