Grid Scale

Utilities want to know more about storage. A new lab will throw the kitchen sink at it

Utilities want to know more about storage. A new lab will throw the kitchen sink at it
20 MW Energy Storage Project in Franklin County (Courtesy: New York Power Authority)

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Electricity (OE) announced a new high-tech facility at the Pacific Northwest National Lab (PNNL) in Richland, Wash., where researchers can test energy storage capabilities in a realistic environment.

OE joined PNNL in opening the 93,000-square-foot Grid Storage Launchpad (GSL), focused on advanced battery research. The GSL will support OE’s efforts to develop grid-scale energy storage technology by enabling testing and validation of next-generation materials and systems under realistic grid operating conditions.

The GSL will also bring in industry and national lab researchers who can conduct independent tests and validate basic materials and prototypes that are safer, more cost-effective and more durable, DOE said.

“This new Grid Storage Launchpad is where we will transform the energy storage industry, which is a key to modernizing the U.S. electric grid,” said Dr. Geri Richmond, DOE’s Under Secretary for Science and Innovation. “The scientists and researchers who test everything from smaller prototype batteries to large, grid-scale battery systems will lead us forward into a new world where energy storage is safer, durable, and more affordable. When we bring the smartest minds in the industry and give them the tools to advance energy storage, we move our nation that much closer to a cleaner energy future.”

A good portion of energy storage technology is still relatively new as the energy industry adapts to the energy transition. While the industry should be lauded for adopting resiliency measures like energy storage, there are still gaps and little to no firm understanding of long-term reliability.

A recent report from the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Pathways to Improved Energy Storage Reliability, explores the challenges of assessing reliability for the large swath of storage technologies and delves into current indications from reliability data. The report also provides a framework meant to allow for more clarity in storage reliability, in addition to results from EPRI members that highlight member needs in terms of reliability and emerging policy impacts.

The U.S. alone has installed more than 15 GW of energy storage, the report said, but it’s still difficult to determine how reliably those systems operate. EPRI said there appear to be indications that some storage systems face issues and lower reliability when compared to legacy electric utility assets. Historic data for “commercially oriented” storage systems typically spans less than five years, the report said, and there is not much uniformity to the structure or extent of the data. However, there is plenty of reliability assessment data on legacy utility assets, as they have more than 30 years of operational data from a “wide variety” of equipment and manufacturers, the report said.

To address these challenges, EPRI created an overall framework for its research that links performance analysis to reliability analysis, which is meant to inform maintenance leading practices and asset management practices, it said — a “continuous, circular effort” informed by field data and experiences.

Based on the data it has collected so far, EPRI found that storage typically has the highest unavailability when there is an isolated “plant trouble” cause. CAISO defines plant trouble as when “plant equipment fails or is in danger of imminent failure resulting in a curtailment of dispatchable capacity.” Additionally, EPRI found that storage typically experiences almost three times the amount of plant trouble when compared to other IBRs.

Only a few years ago, electric utilities were still kicking the tires on the potential energy storage applications. Lithium-ion batteries had already emerged as the market leader with rapidly declining costs and myriad use cases. But utilities, charged with maintaining safety and reliability at the least cost, were slow getting out of the gate, as they often are with new technology.

Today, however, the dynamic has dramatically shifted. Utilities no longer want to rely on third parties for design, engineering, procurement, construction, and maintenance work: they aim to own as much of the project lifecycle as possible. The goal, they say, is to improve efficiency, establish standards, and develop internal expertise. When a battery system fails, utilities require an immediate response, as opposed to hours or days when relying on a manufacturer or supplier, which likely isn’t located in its service territory.

Originally published in POWERGRID International.