Why a 10 GW line beats a 10 GWh BESS in cost - let’s build both !
Dr. Wilhelm Graupner
Executive Director, AVL - Physicist for life - opinions are mine - facts rule ?????? at #ww520 - connection requests may take a while ??
Introduction:
?? Inspired by discussion with Michael Sura Dec 15 2024.
?? This is a first draft - might have to rework a few things.
?? If you wish, tear it apart ??
Intent:
To justify the claim that a 10 GW transmission line costing €10 billion can avoid the need for 10–20 GWh of BESS capacity, saving €4–12 billion, let’s break this down step by step with a detailed analysis:
Step 1: Cost of Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS)
1. Capital Costs of BESS
? Per kWh Cost: Current costs for utility-scale lithium-ion BESS are approximately €400–€600 per kWh of energy capacity.
? 10–20 GWh Storage: For a system with 10–20 GWh (10,000–20,000 MWh) of storage:
? Lower cost:
? Higher cost:
Thus, the cost of the equivalent BESS capacity ranges from €4 billion to €12 billion.
2. Operational Costs of BESS
? Over a 20-year lifespan, operations and maintenance add approximately €10–15/kWh/year:
? For 10 GWh:
? For 20 GWh:
? Operational costs further increase the total cost of BESS.
Step 2: Cost of Transmission Line
1. Capital Cost of a 10 GW Line
? The cost of high-voltage direct current (HVDC) transmission lines is roughly €1 million per km per GW.
? Assuming the transmission line spans 1,000 km (a typical interconnection distance in Europe):
?
2. Operational Costs of Transmission
? HVDC lines typically incur much lower operational costs than BESS, around €1–2 million per year for a 10 GW line.
领英推荐
? Over 20 years, operational costs total €20–40 million, which is negligible compared to BESS operational costs.
Step 3: Energy Balancing Through Interconnection
1. Transmission Line Capacity
? A 10 GW transmission line can transfer 10 GWh per hour of energy across regions. Over a typical day with high renewable variability, it could balance approximately 120 GWh/day (e.g., wind in northern Europe, solar in southern Europe).
? Over the course of a year, assuming utilization at 30% (average renewable energy variability use case), this translates to:
?
2. Avoided BESS Capacity
? By facilitating inter-regional energy transfers, the transmission line avoids the need for localized storage. If 10–20 GWh of BESS was planned for this balancing, the line replaces it by providing real-time energy flow.
Step 4: Cost Comparison
1. Transmission Line Costs
? Capital + operational costs for 20 years:
2. BESS Costs
? For 10–20 GWh of BESS:
? Capital cost: €4–€12 billion
? Operational cost: €2–€6 billion
? Total: €6–€18 billion
3. Savings
? Total savings from substituting a 10 GW transmission line for 10–20 GWh of BESS:
? Lower estimate:
? Higher estimate:
Conclusion
A 10 GW transmission line costing €10 billion is more cost-effective than deploying 10–20 GWh of BESS, saving between €4 billion and €12 billion. This assumes the line efficiently transfers renewable energy between regions, reducing the need for localized storage.
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory - Physicist
2 个月https://www.dhirubhai.net/posts/activity-7217396231512186882-WKYu?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
UK Operations Manager at Soundon | Liquid Cooled ESS | Battery Energy Storage Solutions | BESS (96kWh-5MWh), AI-driven energy storage | Innovating with a fresh, collaborative approach to drive results
2 个月Cable connector costs are obscene.There is no comparison to BESS at current pricing. From an energy security point, it’s harder to sabotage a land based asset. Localised BESS, Solar and Wind can not be turned off by another country, for political reasons or times when that country wants to retain the energy themselves. Have we not learned a single thing from the Ukraine Russian war. Plan A should be to make abundant cheap energy using everything at our disposal, while having the ability to always provide 100% home based energy. I’m not against cables, but it should always be, a renewables or nuclear only cable backup option, just in front of gas and oil, which isn’t going away any time soon.
Group Leader Digital Detector Electronics at Siemens Healthcare
2 个月A couple of comments: (1) Battery cost is still dropping rapidly while the cost of HV lines is constant. At least in Germany HV lines also meet a lot of resistance from NIMBYs. This certainly favors BESS. (2) The comparison at the headline figure of 10GWh vs. 10GW is not fair. As was stated, a 10GW line can balance 120GWh in a day. This makes the HV line look a lot cheaper, again. (3) Losses need considering as well. Distance will be the deciding factor. (4) Use cases need to be considered. While a model of the whole e.g. European energy infrastructure would be great, I am not sure this is feasible due to continuous developments in generation and consumption. So some heuristics for making investment decisions and getting us moving in the right direction are needed. (5) I agree with the general sentiment: We will need both and we need to get the mix right to make it economically feasible.
Aviation expert at hydrogen science coalition.
2 个月It will be interesting to do the same calculations with sodium-ion batteries.
Energy Transition | #EG Austria | #7Energy - BEG
2 个月I like the ... "let's build both" ... part. We need both and it is the politicians job, to set the guardrails in order to get both for as little money as possible.