The economics of firm solar power from Li-ion and vanadium flow batteries in California

IF 3.3 Q3 ENERGY & FUELS MRS Energy & Sustainability Pub Date : 2022-06-06 DOI:10.1557/s43581-022-00028-w
D. Roberts, S. Brown
{"title":"The economics of firm solar power from Li-ion and vanadium flow batteries in California","authors":"D. Roberts, S. Brown","doi":"10.1557/s43581-022-00028-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The cost of providing near 24-7-365 power from solar panels at a commercial facility in South California was modelled to be similar for vanadium flow batteries (VFB) and lithium ion batteries (LIB) at around $0:20/kWh. In hotter locations, LIB economics suffer due to accelerated background cell ageing. Even within South California there was enough variation to affect the economic comparison. Although LIB degradation could be reduced in a hybrid VFB-LIB system, there was negligible benefit to the overall electricity cost. As a result of falling photovoltaic panel costs in the last decade solar power (PV) is now claimed to be the cheapest source of electricity. However, the intermittent nature of supply means that it cannot solve the energy trilemma alone, and a form of backup power is required for reliability. This application is well suited to batteries, but the cost implications of providing high levels of reliability in this way have not been widely studied. In this work, the levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) achievable by optimal combinations of PV and batteries is determined for a large food retailer at a range of self-sufficiency ratios (SSR). Both lithium ion batteries (LIB), vanadium redox flow batteries (VFB) and hybrid systems of the two technologies are modelled. In combination with an over-sized PV array, both systems are capable of providing a SSR of 0.95 for a LCOE of less than $0.22/kWh. The optimal LCOE values overlap across the SSR range for both technologies depending on cost and ambient temperature assumptions. A VFB is more likely to give the lower LCOE at lower SSR, and a LIB is favoured at high SSR as the cycle rate drops as SSR increases. It is also shown that a state of charge (SOC) minimisation strategy has a significant impact on the LIB economics by reducing calendar ageing. Lastly, hybrid systems combining LIB and VFB were modelled, but in no cases showed an improvement over the optimal single choice. The overlap in the LCOE of the two battery types highlights the importance of other considerations, such as sustainability, space requirements and safety. Graphical abstract","PeriodicalId":44802,"journal":{"name":"MRS Energy & Sustainability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MRS Energy & Sustainability","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1557/s43581-022-00028-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract The cost of providing near 24-7-365 power from solar panels at a commercial facility in South California was modelled to be similar for vanadium flow batteries (VFB) and lithium ion batteries (LIB) at around $0:20/kWh. In hotter locations, LIB economics suffer due to accelerated background cell ageing. Even within South California there was enough variation to affect the economic comparison. Although LIB degradation could be reduced in a hybrid VFB-LIB system, there was negligible benefit to the overall electricity cost. As a result of falling photovoltaic panel costs in the last decade solar power (PV) is now claimed to be the cheapest source of electricity. However, the intermittent nature of supply means that it cannot solve the energy trilemma alone, and a form of backup power is required for reliability. This application is well suited to batteries, but the cost implications of providing high levels of reliability in this way have not been widely studied. In this work, the levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) achievable by optimal combinations of PV and batteries is determined for a large food retailer at a range of self-sufficiency ratios (SSR). Both lithium ion batteries (LIB), vanadium redox flow batteries (VFB) and hybrid systems of the two technologies are modelled. In combination with an over-sized PV array, both systems are capable of providing a SSR of 0.95 for a LCOE of less than $0.22/kWh. The optimal LCOE values overlap across the SSR range for both technologies depending on cost and ambient temperature assumptions. A VFB is more likely to give the lower LCOE at lower SSR, and a LIB is favoured at high SSR as the cycle rate drops as SSR increases. It is also shown that a state of charge (SOC) minimisation strategy has a significant impact on the LIB economics by reducing calendar ageing. Lastly, hybrid systems combining LIB and VFB were modelled, but in no cases showed an improvement over the optimal single choice. The overlap in the LCOE of the two battery types highlights the importance of other considerations, such as sustainability, space requirements and safety. Graphical abstract
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
加州锂离子和钒液流电池太阳能发电的经济性
在南加州的一个商业设施中,通过太阳能电池板提供近24-7-365天的电力的成本与钒液流电池(VFB)和锂离子电池(LIB)相似,约为0:20美元/千瓦时。在较热的地区,由于背景电池老化加速,LIB经济受到影响。即使在南加州,也有足够的差异来影响经济比较。虽然在混合VFB-LIB系统中可以减少LIB退化,但对总体电力成本的好处可以忽略不计。由于过去十年光伏板成本的下降,太阳能(PV)现在被认为是最便宜的电力来源。然而,供应的间歇性意味着它不能单独解决能源三难困境,需要一种备用电源来保证可靠性。这种应用非常适合电池,但以这种方式提供高水平可靠性的成本影响尚未得到广泛研究。在这项工作中,通过光伏和电池的最佳组合来确定大型食品零售商在自给率(SSR)范围内的电力成本(LCOE)。对锂离子电池(LIB)、钒氧化还原液流电池(VFB)和两种技术的混合系统进行了建模。结合超大规模的光伏阵列,这两个系统都能够提供0.95的SSR, LCOE低于0.22美元/千瓦时。根据成本和环境温度假设,两种技术的最佳LCOE值在SSR范围内重叠。在低SSR下,VFB更有可能给出较低的LCOE,而在高SSR下,LIB更有利,因为周期速率随着SSR的增加而下降。它还表明,充电状态(SOC)最小化策略通过减少日历老化对LIB经济产生重大影响。最后,结合LIB和VFB的混合系统进行了建模,但在任何情况下都没有比最优的单一选择更好。两种电池LCOE的重叠突出了其他考虑因素的重要性,例如可持续性、空间要求和安全性。图形抽象
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
MRS Energy & Sustainability
MRS Energy & Sustainability ENERGY & FUELS-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
2.30%
发文量
36
期刊最新文献
MXenes vs MBenes: Demystifying the materials of tomorrow’s carbon capture revolution Materials scarcity during the clean energy transition: Myths, challenges, and opportunities Carbon footprint inventory using life cycle energy analysis Advanced hybrid combustion systems as a part of efforts to achieve carbon neutrality of the vehicles Assessment of the penetration impact of renewable-rich electrical grids: The Jordanian grid as a case study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1