[HN Gopher] Tesla is building a giant battery in Texas
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Tesla is building a giant battery in Texas
        
       Author : samizdis
       Score  : 53 points
       Date   : 2021-03-08 19:09 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arstechnica.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arstechnica.com)
        
       | marshmallow_12 wrote:
       | This battery is obviously not for shock winters since capacity
       | falls in cold weather. When i first saw the title i pictured in
       | my mind a titanic model y rolling through the rural areas of
       | texas...
        
       | umvi wrote:
       | At a certain point you would think it's cheaper to soak up excess
       | energy with something other than lithium-ion, like gravity
       | batteries or flywheels, but apparently not...
        
         | bpodgursky wrote:
         | Pumped-water storage is a big thing elsewhere, but afaik Texas
         | doesn't have any big mountains to make this convenient.
         | 
         | (also, these dams have failed before to great misfortune
         | downstream)
        
         | nine_k wrote:
         | Lithium, iron, phosphorus, and oxygen are all pretty abundant
         | and cheap. The economies of scale and better processes need to
         | kick in (even more) to make them cheaper. Say, steel was very
         | expensive until the Bessemer process became widespread.
         | 
         | Gravity batteries are very low-density, and flywheels are prone
         | to dangerous catastrophic failures. They also need mechanical
         | generators which aren't free. I'm suspect that chemical
         | batteries are the future.
        
           | mixmastamyk wrote:
           | What about cobalt?
        
             | nine_k wrote:
             | These batteries do not use cobalt, as mentioned in the
             | article; they are lithium iron phosphate. (These are the
             | elements I listed.)
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_iron_phosphate_batter
             | y
        
             | DarmokJalad1701 wrote:
             | Not all batteries need cobalt. These are LiFePO4 batteries.
        
         | thehappypm wrote:
         | Batteries are just straight amazing, aren't they? Every other
         | solution is just so complicated. Like pumped storage. You run
         | power to a powerful electric pump, which moves water into a
         | huge reservoir, which produces power through a hydro plant. Or
         | a flywheel. You run electricity to a motor, which spins a huge
         | piece of levitated metal, which then can run a generator.
         | 
         | A battery is an inert block you send electricity directly into
         | and get electricity directly out of. It's quite literally a
         | black box of electrical energy storage.
         | 
         | No other solution is ever going to be quite that simple --
         | electricity in, electricity out. There's always some other
         | complexity, some other mechanism, some other pump, some
         | shielding, some motor.
        
         | giarc wrote:
         | Not an expert by anymeans, but it takes a long time for those
         | to start producing energy when required (5 mins+). I believe in
         | Australia, the Tesla battery was able to start providing energy
         | in seconds.
        
         | doggodaddo78 wrote:
         | It is actually. Pumped energy storage is crazy cheap and
         | efficient, assuming you have land and water.
        
         | choeger wrote:
         | Actually I think batteries will be the cheapest option for a
         | very long time. They can be produced at a much higher scale
         | than today (I wouldn't be surprised if we see 10x the
         | production in the next five to ten years and consequently
         | prices below $30/kwh) and they can be setup incrementally. Most
         | alternatives are fixed-size all-or-nothing affairs. Oh and the
         | biggest downside of batteries, their low energy density doesn't
         | really matter for stationary storage.
        
       | doggodaddo78 wrote:
       | 100 MW for 10 msec is 1 MWh
       | 
       | 100 MW for 100 h is 10 GWh
       | 
       | It helps to use proper units, doesn't it?
       | 
       | Large-scale battery storage is completely asinine when PES is far
       | superior.
        
         | joelwilliamson wrote:
         | 100 MW for 10 ms is 28 Wh.
        
         | pjc50 wrote:
         | There are very few areas suitable for pumped energy storage. It
         | requires specific topology and geology.
        
         | nawgz wrote:
         | What is PES? I only can get results for Power & Energy Society,
         | which seems tangentially but not meaningfully related
        
           | croddin wrote:
           | I think it means Pumped Energy Storage
        
             | nawgz wrote:
             | I was wondering if he was suggesting we roll trains up
             | hills with excess power and use regenerative braking or
             | something like this, I hope he will respond
        
               | jlmorton wrote:
               | No need for a hill! You can dig a deep hole, and fill it
               | with concrete weights.
        
         | nine_k wrote:
         | What is PES?
        
           | morei wrote:
           | Pumped Energy Storage (or rarely: Potential Energy Storage).
           | 
           | Aka pumped hydro.
        
             | nine_k wrote:
             | In Switzerland, and maybe in, say, Appalachia, it's an
             | obvious thing to do.
             | 
             | But if your land lacks serious mountainous features, like
             | much of Texas, it becomes impractical. It's also
             | _seriously_ more capital-intensive: you need to pour like a
             | million tons of concrete.
        
       | philipkglass wrote:
       | Even bigger batteries entered service in California last year.
       | 
       | "At 300MW / 1,200MWh, the world's largest battery storage system
       | so far is up and running"
       | 
       | https://www.energy-storage.news/news/at-300mw-1200mwh-the-wo...
       | 
       |  _Phase 1 of Moss Landing Energy Storage Facility was connected
       | to the power grid and began operating on 11 December 2020, at the
       | site of Moss Landing Power Plant, a natural gas power station
       | owned by Vistra since it acquired the facility's previous owner,
       | Dynegy in 2018._
       | 
       |  _At 300MW / 1,200MWh, the BESS is considerably larger than the
       | 250MW / 250MWh Gateway Energy Storage project brought online
       | earlier this year by LS Power, also in California. Not only that,
       | but Phase 2 of Vistra's project will add another 100MW / 400MWh
       | and is scheduled for completion by August this year._
        
       | j-pb wrote:
       | I wonder if the boring company has any plans to create tunnels
       | that could be used for gravity energy storage.
       | 
       | After all, if they have the tech to continuously bore long
       | tunnels, boring straight down becomes a much easier task as you
       | don't need as much anchorage to provide forward pressure.
       | 
       | You can essentially use the front plate of a TBM, and have it
       | "fall" into the ground with a large weight behind it.
        
         | marshmallow_12 wrote:
         | Better idea (maybe): store even more gravitational energy by
         | sending heavy weights into orbit. Just use booster rockets to
         | make it fall through the atmosphere, regenerating vast amounts
         | of energy in the process.
        
       | loufe wrote:
       | Good lord can we please move away from the common misnomer of kW,
       | MW, GW, and TW when we mean kWh, MWh, GWh, and TWh? It makes me
       | angrier than it should, but aside from BTUs (heating/cooling)
       | it's the only one I'm aware of that is so stubborn.
        
         | ar0 wrote:
         | As far as I read the article they are really talking about 100
         | MW maximum power output; they mention that the Australian
         | version can supply that 100 MW for a bit more than an hour (so
         | store a bit more than 100MWh), so they seem to be aware of the
         | distinction but apparently don't know (?) the energy storage
         | capacity of the planned battery installation.
        
       | lr1970 wrote:
       | To put it in perspective. During the recent cold weather the
       | State of Texas was short of 16GW of power for more than 40 hours
       | making it 640GWh shortfall in amount of energy needed. You would
       | need 6400 batteries 100MWh each to meet such demand. The only
       | thing that a single 100MWh battery in Texas will be good for is
       | stabilizing the grid against short-term load fluctuations -- the
       | job a similar Tesla battery has been successfully doing in
       | Australia.
        
         | ACAVJW4H wrote:
         | I remember that some facilities were shutdown because their
         | auxiliary power generation units froze. So if batteries would
         | only supply these mission critical apparatus their overall
         | effect can be multiplied.
        
           | Dylan16807 wrote:
           | Critical facilities in locations where the grid is shut down?
           | Well in that case a giant central battery can't help those
           | places either, you need on-site batteries.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | grey-area wrote:
         | That is a very important job though and is dramatically cheaper
         | than peaker plants.
        
           | wombatmobile wrote:
           | 'Undeniable success': South Australia's 129MWh Tesla battery
           | 
           | https://www.energy-storage.news/news/undeniable-success-
           | sout...
           | 
           | South Australia's Tesla 'Big Battery' saved consumers $116
           | million in electricity costs last year
           | 
           | https://www.startupdaily.net/2020/03/south-australias-
           | tesla-...
        
         | toomuchtodo wrote:
         | Batteries are not going to substitute for winterized
         | generation. They are to provide ancillary services such as
         | frequency response (as you mention regarding the Tesla
         | Hornsdale Power Reserve install), previously provided primarily
         | by thermal generators, as well as short term dispatchable
         | discharge (think expensive peaker plants). ERCOT (in Texas)
         | also has a market for generators able to provide black start
         | services (note the grid location of Gambit's install in this
         | article, it sits at the intersection of transmission
         | infrastructure connecting it to thermal generators in the area
         | [1]).
         | 
         | During the rolling blackouts, no attention was paid to avoiding
         | circuits that were powering natural gas compressors and other
         | similar natural gas distribution infra [2] (sidenote: I expect
         | Tesla to do well in battery backing such loads). More
         | distributed battery infra makes the grid more durable, and less
         | at risk for totally black starts [3] [4].
         | 
         | From the city's link to project information [5]:
         | 
         | "Will the battery provide energy to Angelton during a black out
         | or natural disaster?
         | 
         | If charged, the battery can help the local electric system come
         | back online by providing energy to 'jump start' electric
         | generators in the. This service is called 'black start'
         | capability; the battery is able to help the grid come back
         | online after going 'black'."
         | 
         | [1] https://openinframap.org/#9.18/29.1828/-95.4064
         | 
         | [2] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/giant-flaw-texas-blackouts-
         | cu... (A Giant Flaw in Texas Blackouts: It Cut Power to Gas
         | Supplies)
         | 
         | [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_start (A black start is
         | the process of restoring an electric power station or a part of
         | an electric grid to operation without relying on the external
         | electric power transmission network to recover from a total or
         | partial shutdown.)
         | 
         | [4] https://www.texastribune.org/2021/02/18/texas-power-
         | outages-... (Texas was "seconds and minutes" away from
         | catastrophic monthslong blackouts, officials say)
         | 
         | [5] http://angleton.tx.us/DocumentCenter/View/3793/Gambit-
         | Energy...
        
         | sschueller wrote:
         | I would argue that a water damn would be a better storage of
         | energy than batteries. Although it can be environmentaly
         | problematic depending where you put it, it can hold an enormous
         | amount if energy which can be switched on in seconds.
        
           | photojosh wrote:
           | Given the discussion about the Australian Tesla battery,
           | worthwhile mentioning that we're also doing a massive pumped
           | hydro project "Snowy Hydro 2.0". 2000 MW, 350 GWh storage.
           | But it's a tad controversial.
           | 
           | [0] https://www.snowyhydro.com.au/snowy-20/about/
           | 
           | [1] https://theconversation.com/snowy-2-0-will-not-produce-
           | nearl...
        
       | simonebrunozzi wrote:
       | Can we have "100 MW" in the title, either after "giant", or in
       | substitution with "giant"? I think it would be a much better
       | title.
       | 
       | Edit: also, forgot to mention that most people don't seem to know
       | that batteries used for these type of large projects are not in
       | competition with batteries used in cars, in the sense that they
       | are either of a different kind, or recycled/used ones.
        
       | retzkek wrote:
       | Both TFA and the Bloomberg article it references [1] mention the
       | 100MW power throughput of the battery, which is pretty
       | meaningless without also knowing the energy capacity. For
       | reference, the similar 100MW battery installation in Australia
       | has 129MWh capacity [2].
       | 
       | This project is less remarkable when you read "About 2,100
       | megawatts of battery storage ... are in advanced stages of
       | connecting to Ercot's grid." [1].
       | 
       | 1. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-03-08/tesla-
       | is-... 2. https://arstechnica.com/cars/2017/12/tesla-beats-
       | deadline-sw...
        
         | ar0 wrote:
         | Also for comparison: a single pumped-storage plant will often
         | have storage capacity in the GWh; e.g. the Linth-Limmern pumped
         | storage part in Switzerland can store 33 GWh and provides 1000
         | MW peak power.
        
           | ACAVJW4H wrote:
           | When I overlay the population density map, on top of the
           | elevation map. I think there aren't many opportunities in
           | Texas for grid scale pumped hydro storage. Although pumped
           | hydro has huge potential it is not homogeneously distributed
           | all over the world according to this map.
           | https://www.hydroreview.com/world-regions/22-million-gwh-
           | of-...
        
             | retzkek wrote:
             | Bill Gates mentioned pressurized pumped-hydro storage in
             | his book, (which was the first I had heard of it), and it
             | sounds quite promising and something Texas is well-suited
             | for:
             | 
             | > GLIDES costs as low as $13/kWh and $346/kWh and roundtrip
             | efficiencies as high as 80% can be achieved using depleted
             | oil/gas reservoirs and high-pressure pipe segments as
             | pressure reservoirs, respectively.
             | 
             | https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/12/f69/02_ORNL
             | _...
        
           | jacquesm wrote:
           | Elevation translates in to 'head' and that's the single
           | reason that this works well in Switzerland which has
           | something that many other places do not have: very high
           | mountains. With sufficient head the potential energy of a
           | reservoir of modest size can be very impressive, and without
           | you can have a huge reservoir that barely moves the needle.
        
           | ASalazarMX wrote:
           | > pumped-storage plant
           | 
           | Seeing the title, I jokingly thought of generating
           | hydroelectric power off a dam, and storing excess power by
           | pumping the water back up, Sisyphus like. I'm very surprised
           | this is actually a thing.
        
             | glogla wrote:
             | Yes!
             | 
             | It's also only slightly less efficient than batteries.
        
             | ed25519FUUU wrote:
             | https://www.npr.org/2021/01/27/961242867/the-worlds-
             | biggest-...
        
             | heleninboodler wrote:
             | Taken to extremes of solar+pumped-storage, we could end up
             | with a situation where the earth spins more quickly in the
             | early morning when the moment of inertia of the planet is
             | lower because the solar panels haven't started moving all
             | that water mass to its higher elevation yet.
        
         | Dylan16807 wrote:
         | > which is pretty meaningless without also knowing the energy
         | capacity
         | 
         | I disagree. You can reasonably assume a battery bank will have
         | a capacity between an hour and a few hours.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | inglor_cz wrote:
       | (Dons his prophetic hat.)
       | 
       | Even if this battery seems to be gigantic now, in 15 years it
       | will look small, much like Falcon 1 is now just a tiny teeny
       | rocket compared to Starship + Super Heavy.
        
         | marshmallow_12 wrote:
         | (dons his prophetic tie clip)
         | 
         | In 110 years time Elons' interstellar Universeship will dwarf
         | both his battery _and_ the Starship.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-03-08 23:02 UTC)