The document discusses the benefits and technologies related to facility-scale battery storage, emphasizing its role in power quality, demand charge reduction, demand response, and renewable generation integration. It covers various battery types, their costs, efficiencies, and market challenges facing energy storage systems. Additionally, it highlights case studies showcasing successful implementations and the evolving landscape of energy storage technologies.

1. Main Headquarters: 120 Water Street, Suite 350, North Andover, MA 01845 With offices in: NY, ME, TX, CA, OR www.ers-inc.com
FACILITY SCALE BATTERY STORAGE
Jesse Remillard – Energy & Resource Solutions

2.  To ensure power quality and level demand
 For integration of renewable generation
 Others?
Incentives
 NYSERDA and Con Edison
 $2,100/kW for batteries
 PG&E
 $1,620/kW for advanced energy storage
WHY ENERGY STORAGE
11/4/2015 2

3. GRID VS DISTRIBUTED ENERGY
STORAGE
Source:
http://www.rmi.org/electricity_battery_value 3

4. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
4Source: SCE RFO kW Capacity

5. 1. Introduction
2. Definitions and key terminology
3. Facility scale value streams
4. Energy storage technologies
5. Technical and market barriers
AGENDA
11/4/2015 5

6. KEY TERMINOLOGY
11/4/2015 6
 Power capacity = rated kW
 Energy capacity = rated kWh
 Discharge time =
Energy capacity
Avg. power output
 Depth of discharge (DOD) = capacity used
 Roundtrip Efficiency
 Cycle life = number of useful cycles

7. 1. Supply = Power Plant
a. Energy = kWh
b. Demand = kW
2. Transmission
a. Wires and poles
b. Controls
c. Maintenance
d. Oversight
UTILITY BILLS
11/4/2015 7

8. EXAMPLE UTILITY BILL
11/4/2015 8

9. 1. Power quality and dependability
2. Demand charge reduction
3. Demand response
4. Retail energy time shift
5. Renewables integration
FACILITY BENEFITS
11/4/2015 9

10.  Systems that require high
power quality or
uninterruptible power
supply (UPS)
 Data centers or
telecommunications,
emergency response, medical,
industrial
 The most common type of
facility energy storage seen
today
POWER QUALITY AND DEPENDABILITY
11/4/2015 10

11.  Arguably the most important emerging
application
 Facilities with >50% of their electric bill from
demand charges are key candidates.
 Simple payback approximately 5 years
DEMAND CHARGE REDUCTION
11/4/2015 11

12. EXAMPLE DEMAND PROFILE
11/4/2015 12

13.  Some utilities incentivize demand
reduction during peak demand events
 Peak demand events are typically during
hot summer days and are not known
until just prior
 Cost savings of $10,000 to $15,000 for a
100kW system installed in NYC
DEMAND RESPONSE
11/4/2015 13

14.  Shifting use from high cost periods to
low cost periods
 On peak = price of electricity during the on
peak periods (daytime)
 Off peak = price of electricity during off
peak periods (nighttime)
RETAIL ENERGY TIME SHIFT
11/4/2015 14

15.  Energy storage is critical for the
integration of large amounts of
grid scale renewable generation
 Retail = price you pay per kWh
 Wholesale = price they pay you
per kWh
RENEWABLES INTEGRATION
11/4/2015 15

16. Value of systems increases greatly with
stacked services
 Demand charge reduction/demand
response and retail energy time shift
 Demand response and emergency
response
 Demand charge reduction and demand
response
 UPS and grid support
DUAL PURPOSE SYSTEMS
11/4/2015 16

17. CASE STUDY 1
 Peak Demand Reduction and Emergency
Backup
 Barclay Tower during Hurricane Sandy

18.  Demand charge reduction and demand
response
 The owners of Barclay Tower,
Glenwood Management
 1 MW across portfolio in NYC
CASE STUDY 2
11/4/2015 18

19.  Demand response and emergency
response
 The Irving Company – largest landlord
in Orange County
 10 MW
 $$$ “Tens of millions” over 10 year
contract with SoCal Edison
CASE STUDY 3
11/4/2015 19

20.  Power quality and grid support
 Regional transmission organization
PJM
 DE, IL, NJ, NC, OH, PA, TN, VA, WV, DC
 Incentive of $40/MWh for frequency
regulation
CASE STUDY 4
11/4/2015 20

21. Purpose Power Discharge Usage
Payback (w/o
incentives)
Resiliency and power
quality
100 kW to
1 MW
≤ 15 minutes Variable
NA (Critical to
production)
Demand charge
reduction
50 kW to
1 MW
1 to 4 hours Daily 4-6 years
Demand response
50 kW to
1 MW
4 to 6 hours Infrequent
>> equipment
life
Retail Energy Time
Shift
100 kW to
1 MW
1 to 6 hours Daily
>> equipment
life
Renewables
integration
100 kW to
500 MW
several hours Daily
>> equipment
life
VALUE STREAM SUMMARY
11/4/2015 21

22. Commercial
1. Lead acid batteries
2. Lithium ion
3. Sodium sulfur
4. Flywheels
Other Promising Emerging
1. Flow batteries
2. Metal air
3. Magnesium salt
TECHNOLOGIES
11/4/2015 22

23. LI-ION COST CURVE
23Source: Bjorn Nykvist and Mans Nilsson 2015

24.  Status:
 Most mature, lowest capital cost, widely used
 $500 to $700/kWh
 Widely accepted by building codes
 Con:
 Performance lacking
 300 to 500 cycle life, 3 to 5 year shelf life
 efficiencies of 70% to 80%
 Pro:
 Advanced lead acid batteries improve
performance
 Easily recycled
LEAD ACID
11/4/2015 24

25. LITHIUM ION
25
 Status:
 Recently incorporated into NYC building fire code
 Con:
 High cost: $1,000 to $2,000/kWh
 Pro:
 High performance
 2,000 to 5,000 cycles
 10 to 15 year lifetime
 Efficiencies upwards of 98%
11/4/2015

26. SODIUM SULFUR (MOLTEN SALT)
11/4/2015 26
 Status:
 Best suited to larger capacity
 Competitive cost: $750 to $2,000/kWh
 Not widely accepted by codes
 Con:
 Limited manufacturers
 High operating temp (>300F)
 Pro:
 Good performance
 2,000 to 4,500 cycle life
 10 to 15 year shelf life
 Efficiencies of 70% to 80%

27.  Several commercial suppliers in the USA, but costs
very high: $2,000 to $4,000/kW
 Performance and lifetime is very good: indefinite
lifetimes and high efficiencies
 Not practical for large capacity energy storage
 Emerging low cost technology
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXhKNq-R-Lw
FLYWHEELS
27

28. TECHNOLOGY SUMMARY
11/4/2015 28
Market
Battery
Type
Installed Energy Cost
($/kWh)
Roundtrip
Efficiency
Useful Life
Outdoors Indoors
Cycle
Life
Expected
Lifetime
(Years)
CommercialTechnologies
Lead
acid
$400 -
$700
$500 – $700 70% – 80%
500 –
1,500
3 – 5
Lithium
ion
$1,000 –
$2,000
$1,500 –
$2,500
85% – 98%
2,000 –
5,000
10 – 15
Sodium
Sulfur
(salt)
$750 –
$900
$1,000 –
$2,000
70% – 80%
2,500 –
4,500
10 – 15
Flywheel
$2,000 -
$4,000
$400? 85% - 90% > 10,000 >15 yrs

29.  Flow
 Liquid Metal
 Zinc Air
 Sodium Nickel Chloride
 Magnesium Salt
 Breakthrough technology yet to come?
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
11/4/2015 29

30.  Status
 SunEdison to buy 1,000
Imergy flow batteries for
rural India Solar
 Con
 Large footprint
 pumps
 Pro
 Extremely high life
 Easy to add energy capacity
 $500/kWh potentially as low
as $300/kWh
FLOW BATTERIES
30

31.  Status
 Multiple startups targeting it: Eos, ZAF,
Fluidic
 Cons
 Inherent problems with charging
 Up to 5,000 cycle life, same as Li-ion
 Pros
 Costs supposedly as low as $160/kWh
ZINC AIR
11/4/2015 31

32.  Status
 Available now from Aquion
 Cons
 Lifetime – 5 years = not much better than Pb acid
 Pros
 Cheap ~ $250/kWh
 Most environmentally benign
MAGNESIUM SALT
11/4/2015 32

33.  Status
 Progression of sodium sulfur batteries
 Cons
 High temperature
 Cycle life not as long as some other emerging
techs
 Pros
 Cheaper
 Safer than NaS batteries
SODIUM NICKEL CHLORIDE
11/4/2015 33

34.  Status
 Based on research at MIT
 Ambri postponed release of product to
spring 2016
 Cons
 High temperature
 Not suitable for mobile applications
 Pros
 Cheap
LIQUID METAL
11/4/2015 34

35. Yet unknown what dominant
technologies will be
 Cheaper
 Targeting $160/kWh to $300/kWh
 Longer lifetimes
 Targeting 3,000 to 10,000+ cycles
 More attractive marketing
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
SUMMARY
11/4/2015 35

36.  High costs
 Limited lifetimes
 Large
 Heavy
 Toxic
 Fire hazards
TECHNICAL BARRIERS
11/4/2015 36

37.  Public perception of hazards
 Challenging to find suitable locations in
urban environments
 Local fire codes are especially wary of
newer commercial systems
MARKET BARRIERS
11/4/2015 37

38.  Future grids will need energy storage to some
extent
 Many questions, but research is on-going
 CA goal of 33% generation from renewables
by 2020 will create market pull for storage
 Costs are coming down
 Utilities, code officials, and facilities need to
work together to integrate energy storage to
mutual benefit
SUMMARY
11/4/2015 38

39. CONTACTS
 Jesse Remillard
jremillard@ers-inc.com
207.622.6888 x 414
11/4/2015 39

40.  Multiple battery type energy storage
systems?
 Future uses when batteries are cheaper?
 Most promising battery technology?
DISCUSSION
11/4/2015 40

41.  http://www.ease-
storage.eu/technologies.html
 http://www.ambri.com/
 http://www.velkess.com/
 http://www.johnsoncontrols.com/content/
us/en/products/power-solutions/battery-
brands.html
 http://www.teslamotors.com/powerwall
 http://www.aquionenergy.com/
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
11/4/2015 41