solar energy

Battery Storage and Ancillary Services

Ancillary services by definition are services that support the transmission of electricity from its generation site to the customer or helps maintain its usability throughout the system. Many people may not know that the standard 120 volts we are used to receiving from the wall actually varies a tiny amount from second to second. If you were to monitor the power from the wall, the voltage may swing from 118-122 volts. We do not typically think about the mechanisms that take place to keep our power useful and ready for when we flip the switch.

On a larger scale, ancillary services are generators or other service providers that are synchronized to the grid and are able to rapidly increase output in three major categories: contingency, regulation, and flexibility reserves. The contingency reserve requirement is assumed to be constant for all hours of the year and corresponds to a spinning reserve equal to about 3% of peak load and about 4.5% of the average load. Another way to think of “spinning reserves” are the backup or redundancy built into the grid. Basically, we slightly overbuild the total generation needed so the grid can be provided with ancillary services making good quality power possible.

Additionally, regulation and flexibility reserve requirements vary by hour based on the net load and impact of variability and uncertainty of wind and solar. The availability and constraints of individual generators to provide reserves are a major source of the cost of providing reserves. Not all generators are capable of providing certain regulation reserves based on operational practice or lack of necessary equipment to follow a regulation signal.

So, what does the future of ancillary services hold and how can they be more beneficial?

At a residential level, a combination of solar and storage is only worthwhile when specific conditions are met that make the value of storage greater than the cost of installing It. For example, when the renewable energy creates an excess, the extra energy can be stored for later consumption. This would allow the customer to buy less power from the grid and enable them to cut their costs.

However, some customers are now being charged for using power during peak times, which is known as a demand charge. Energy storage can be used to lower peak time energy consumption, or the highest amount of power a customer draws from the grid; therefore, reducing the amount customers spend on demand charges. In North America, the break-even point for most demand charges is $9 per kilowatt. Energy storage can lower that cost to $4 or $5 per kilowatt by as early as 2020. As storage costs decrease, more customers will begin to see economic benefits and existing storage users will see the optimum size of energy storage increase.

Lastly, energy storage will impact electricity grids as a whole because it provides more function than just power on demand. Batteries can provide the grid with ancillary services like frequency regulation and should be compensated to do so. All this is to say, if utilities provide appropriate price signals to the market, customers will respond by installing battery storage where and how they can be compensated.

Currently, grids experience a continuous imbalance between the power they produce and its consumption because of the millions of devices that are turned on and off in an unrelated way. The imbalance can cause frequencies to deviate, which can affect equipment and potentially hurt the stability of the grid. Energy storage is well suited for frequency regulation because of its rapid response time and its ability to charge and discharge efficiently. This storage could significantly reduce the amount and cost of the reserves currently needed to provide such services to the grid.

One reason for the optimistic outlook on battery storage’s role with providing ancillary services is the progress lithium ion batteries have made in recent years. In 2015, lithium-ion batteries were responsible for 95 percent of energy storage at both the residential and grid levels. The reason for the increase in popularity is due to the price dropping, safety improving, and better performance characteristics. All of these qualities are leading to lithium-ion batteries being suitable for stationary energy storage across the grid; ranging from large-scale installations and transmission infrastructure to individual and residential use, even without being appropriately compensated for ancillary services.

The most important aspect is the large-scale deployment of energy storage that could overturn the status quo for many electricity markets. In developed countries, central or bulk generation traditionally has been used to satisfy instantaneous demand, with ancillary services helping to smooth out discrepancies between generation and load; and energy storage is well suited to provide such ancillary services. Eventually, as costs fall, it could move beyond that role, providing more and more power to the grid, displacing plants; however, that time has not yet come although approaching quickly. It is important to recognize that energy storage has the potential to upend the industry structures, both physical and economic, that have defined power markets for the last century or more.

Media Fusion uses solar power to brighten bottom line

In May, Media Fusion added solar energy panels to its building to help supplement its power supply. The company “sells kilowatts back to the grid” and the company is credited a certain portion back from the utility company each month.

“I think the environmental part is a very big part, but let’s just set that aside. Let’s look at this from a business standpoint. This is a no-brainer from a business standpoint,” said Media Fusion Inc. President Richard Williams said. “My job as president of the company is to help us be efficient in operations and as a government contractor the government looks to us and we are graded on the efficiency of our business.”

Energy Alabama analyzed the Media Fusion building for energy saving possibilities and recommended solar panels for its flat roof.

To read the full article, please visit: http://www.al.com/business/index.ssf/2017/06/media_fusion_uses_solar_power.html

An In-Depth Look into the Solar Trade War

Exposition

Recently the world of solar energy has been filled with tension at the beginning of what is now being deemed the “Solar Trade Wars.” Suniva, a United States based solar cell and module manufacturing company, declared a state of bankruptcy back in April of this year. Since then, Suniva has drafted a petition under Section 201 of the 1974 Trade Act  that would call for a drastic increase to the tariffs of imported solar modules and cells, with new prices reaching a proposed 40 cents per watt and 78 cents per watt on modules over a period of four years. Suniva argues that they cannot compete with the cheap prices of those imported goods.

SolarWorld, a German based solar manufacturing company, is supporting Suniva in its petition. Juergen Stein, SolarWorld’s U.S president, had this to say about the petition:

“SolarWorld — as the largest U.S. crystalline-silicon solar manufacturer, with more than 40 years of U.S. manufacturing experience — will assess the case brought by Suniva but prefers that any action to be taken against unfair trade shall consider all parts of the U.S. solar value chain. We’re committed to helping to find a way that also considers the interests of other parties playing fair in the U.S. solar market.”

Suniva reported that it faced losses of $50 million in 2015 due to a “flooding of the U.S market” brought by Asian countries. Suniva states the flooding of the U.S market of imported goods caused record low prices for solar cells and modules, which inevitably led them to bankruptcy.

The Context of Conflict

 

The petition submitted by Suniva has raised some degree of conflict, especially with the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA). SEIA, which represents thousands of installers and developers, opposes the petition on the claim that the proposed tariffs would potentially take away 88,000 jobs from the U.S solar industry, almost one-third of the entire U.S solar workforce. The states that are projected to see the most significant impact are California with 15,800 job losses, South Carolina with 7,000 job losses, and Texas with 6,300 job losses.

SEIA President and CEO, Abigail Ross Hopper, stated that “Rather than help the industry, the action would kill many thousands of American jobs and put a stop to billions of dollars in private investment.”

She adds, “Our estimates show that even in the states where Suniva and its lone supporter, SolarWorld, have operations, if the petition succeeds, there would be many times more jobs lost than expected gains for two struggling companies.”

SEIA predicts that solar jobs would be lost in all parts of the U.S. market. The utility-scale market, which has paced the industry’s growth for years, would see jobs shrink by 60%, while residential and commercial employment would fall by 44% and 46%, respectively.

Christian Hudson, a representative of Suniva, retorts in light of SEIA’s new announcement. He says, “First we heard the scare tactic that 260,000 jobs were in jeopardy, now we hear a revised number of 88,000 – and while this is yet another inaccurate scare tactic, at this rate, we might hear accurate numbers by the end of summer.”

Suniva also argues that the tariffs would increase investment opportunities and competition in the U.S market by eliminating much of the foreign competition. In a somewhat bizarre twist, however, Suniva itself is majority owned by Shunfeng International Clean Energy, a company based in China.

Outcomes

The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) agreed to hear Suniva’s case in May, and is expected to reach a decision sometime around September. Their decision will determine if relief is necessary for Suniva. The ITC will then make a recommendation to the President of the United States on their suggested course of action. If the case is approved by the ITC, it will then go onto President Donald Trump who will have 60 days to make a final decision on the matter. The President is not required to abide by the recommendations of the ITC should the case reach his desk.

Huntsville Business Installs Solar Panels to Reduce Energy Consumption

HUNTSVILLE, Ala. – A Huntsville business is taking advantage of sunlight to save some serious cash.

Media Fusion, Inc. is a Huntsville business and the latest to join the North Alabama Buildings Performance Challenge and install solar panels.

“Energy Alabama was the key for us,” said McElyea. “If it weren’t for Energy Alabama, we wouldn’t have flipped the switch.”

To read the full article, please visit: http://whnt.com/2017/06/02/huntsville-business-installs-solar-panels-to-reduce-energy-consumption/

To view the installation under construction (time-lapse), please visit:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rdwglsBF0g

the duck curve of renewable energy

The Duck Curve: What is it and what does it mean?

So let’s talk about the duck curve and what it means in the world of renewable energy. But what is the “duck curve?” Does it involve our adorable little animal friends who quack the day away? Well, kinda, but not really.

Put simply, the duck curve is the graphic representation of higher levels of wind and solar on the grid during the day resulting in a high peak load in mid to late evening. The difference in the Duck Curve and a regular load chart is that the duck curve shows two high points of demand and one very low point of demand, with the ramp up in between being extremely sharp. It looks like a duck! Since renewable energy has become more common over the years, the duck curve is appearing more often and is getting worse.

Let’s look at an example of what the duck curve looks like:

 

The duck curve, explained.

As you can see, this chart shows the electric load of the California Independent System Operator (ISO), just think the California grid, on an average spring day. The lines show the net load—the demand for electricity minus the supply of renewable energy—with each line representing a different year, from 2012 to 2020. The chart also shows that energy demand reaches its peak in the morning (between 6 A.M. and 9 A.M.) and afternoon times (between 6 P.M. and 9 P.M). This demand shows that people need more energy as they get prepared for work or school in the morning and when they come home from work or school in the afternoon.

Let’s look at lines 2012 and 2017, for example. Comparatively, the 2012 line is much more smoother than the 2017 line. This is because the feed of a renewable power supply has not yet been introduced. By slowly integrating solar energy, the demand for electricity from the electrical grid becomes smaller and smaller. However, the renewable energy source is not enough to meet the demand in its entirety, especially in those peaks hours that I referenced earlier. So the electric grid is left to pick up the slack, which can sometimes be problematic.

Why is a duck causing problems?

As you can see by the chart, solar energy works best during the bright hours of the day, which makes energy demand lower greatly. We’ll call this the duck’s belly: the lowest point of demand. The demand begins to rise rapidly as the sun sets and people get home at 6 P.M. There’s no sun to power all of the appliances getting turned on by people returning home from work or school, and the grid is left to answer to that high demand. Therefore, the demand rises very rapidly (the duck’s neck) to a peak in the afternoon hours (the duck’s head).

For many decades, energy demand followed a fairly predictable pattern, with very little change in levels of demand. This allowed electrical workers to become experts with sustaining a stable output of energy. Well the duck curve kinda throws a wrench in that. In order to meet the baseline requirement, or “baseload”, utilities run BIG power plants that run on either nuclear or coal, which run around the clock. The problem with coal and nuclear power plants is that they’re expensive to completely startup and shutdown, and are more effective in ramping up or down. Then there’s the “peak load,” which is satisfied by peaker plants that usually run on natural gas, and more frequently renewables.

In order to maintain top efficiency, regulators will often turn peaker power plants off and ramp down the baseline plants during times of very low demand, such as hours of the “duck’s belly.” However, the sudden and rapid increase in demand means that regulators have to quickly turn back on these power plants, which is not only expensive, but could lead to more pollution and high maintenance costs.

Another problem with the duck curve lies in the belly of the duck. In some places, demand becomes so low that grid operators are forced to turn off the peaker power plants and ramp down the baseline power plants. Then, just a few hours later, they all have to get ramped up again with little to no warning, which can cause problems for grid stability.

So problems with the duck curve lie in those sudden and steep changes in demand. Grid operators and regulators struggle to maintain stability and efficiency by turning power plants on and off, causing instability in the power supply, large expense to taxpayers, and pollution to the environment.

So what can we do about the Duck Curve?

One probable solution for the duck curve can be found in a method called interconnection. This strategy involves connecting multiple energy grids together to make a large energy grid. In theory, this would broaden and disperse the load and availability of solar and wind across a larger area, which in turn would flatten the duck curve.

This strategy could provide a long term solution to the problem. However, although the technology already exists, the politics of a large, interconnected grid is unlikely due to “not in my backyard” concerns and securing the rights of way.

The second method of smoothing out the duck curve is committing to the storage of energy generated by solar and wind, instead of immediately sending that energy directly to the grid. The energy can then be “dispatched” when it’s needed, and would almost definitely flatten the curve. This method could prove very expensive to execute in near term however battery storage continues to fall in price and more utilities are actively seeking it as a viable solution.