For too long, the rhetoric around what storage can do for the grid vastly outweighed the actual doing. This year, the industry closed that gap more than ever before.

Exceedingly few batteries actually live up to the vision of “storing clean power for when the sun isn’t shining.” Batteries perform miniscule adjustments to grid frequency, or lower businesses’ electricity consumption during a peak hour, or sit around waiting to provide clean backup power, but try messaging that to voters.

This year, finally, big renewables projects with batteries attached closed deals and even entered operations. A few states that wanted to incubate storage industries of their own proved that sharp policy really can create new markets in relatively short periods of time.

Big regulated utilities with no prior interest in batteries decided they’d like to own them in copious amounts. All the headlines made it possible to forget that the scientific pioneers of lithium-ion batteries won the Nobel freakin’ Prize this fall.

That said, the U.S. storage market will triple next year and double again the year after that. All this excitement is still just a little snack before the main course. But, like some well-marinated olives or a tin of anchovies, little snacks can pack a lot of flavor.

Here are the tastiest stories that emerged in 2019, in no particular order.

Massive utility procurements

California leads the nation in putting batteries to work for a decarbonizing grid. But try convincing any other state with an argument that starts with “Well, California says…”

Storage advocates no longer need to, because utilities in numerous states are acquiring unprecedented portfolios of grid batteries.

The U.S. Energy Storage Association (ESA) today published “U.S. Energy Storage Operational Safety Guidelines,” which provides energy storage businesses and users a compendium of codes, standards and additional guidelines to plan for and mitigate wide-ranging potential operational hazards.

This is the latest resource to come from ESA’s years-long effort to advance industry safety strategies, which culminated in the April 2019 announcement of an Energy Storage Corporate Responsibility Initiative (CRI) Task Force and Corporate Responsibility Pledge. Currently, nearly 60 signatories have taken the safety and responsibility pledge, including dozens of companies that have contributed plans and guidelines to this latest safety and planning guide.

“The energy storage industry’s top priority is the safety of employees, first responders and our communities,” said ESA CEO Kelly Speakes-Backman. “The ESA Corporate Responsibility Initiative puts our best experts together to create a library of vitally important educational resources on safety standards and guidelines to plan for possible hazards and mitigate risk. We’re proud to see dozens of industry leaders contributing to responsible management practices.”

As part of the CRI initiative, ESA has issued an Emergency Response Plan template for developers, operators, and host sites; a white paper “Operational Risk Management in the U.S. Energy Storage Industry: Lithium-Ion Fire and Thermal Event Safety;” and this newest “U.S. Energy Storage Operational Safety Guidelines.” Forthcoming resources will address reuse, recycling and safe disposal practices.

These CRI safety resources derive from dozens of meetings among industry, codes and standards leaders and other safety stakeholders in 2019 to share insights and strategies on risk mitigation, emergency response actions and end-of-life planning and recycling.

Renovations to six public housing buildings in the small town of Vårgårda, South West Sweden will allow them to run on renewable energy all year round. Electricity and heat from a microgrid combining solar panels, batteries, heat pumps, hydrogen production and storage and hydrogen fuel cells will supply the 172 apartments.

“We will be providing the building with all its electricity and heat via a combined [Nilsson Energy] RE8760 system where we store renewable energy from solar until it is needed,” Martina Wettin, one of the founders of Nilsson Energy, told Microgrid Knowledge.

Working with the municipality of Vårgårda, Nilsson Energy will provide a system designed to provide renewable energy for 8,760 hours a year.

Sweden’s long summer days
The roof of each of the six buildings has been fitted with around 5,400 square feet of solar PV. During the long Swedish summer days, the solar electricity powers the building and charges the battery. Any excess is fed to an electrolyzer and compressor for centralized hydrogen production and storage for the winter.

During the winter, stored hydrogen is fed to each building’s 5 kW fuel cell for electricity generation. Waste heat from this process tops up the heating provided by a geothermal heat pump. The systems of the six buildings connect to form a microgrid, providing flexibility and security of supply. The RE8760 operating system controls the energy flows.

Accumulating running hours
For the time being, the individual apartments receive their electricity from the main grid until the system demonstrates enough successful running hours. However, the system already provides heating and hot water demand, allowing expensive district heating to be disconnected. Power for shared services like lighting for the stairwells is also provided.

The production, storage and use of hydrogen in residential properties has broken new ground.

“We spent a lot of time working with the authorities. It is new, people aren’t that used to having hydrogen out in a densely populated area… It has been a very important process that has been going on for more or less three years,” Wettin said.

The India Energy Storage Alliance (IESA) has published its fifth edition of its India Stationary Energy Storage market report, which predicts that the market for energy storage in India will grow at a CAGR of 6.1% by 2026.

The report is split into four sections, looking at the total stationary energy storage market, the grid-scale stationary energy storage market, stationary storage in behind-the-meter (BTM) applications and railways. It uses 2018 as the base year, before forming predictions for 2019 through to 2026.

IESA reports that in 2018, the energy storage market in India was worth US$2.8 billion, and will continue to grow at pace in coming years.

Total annual MWh additions were 24.4GWh last year, and are expected to grow to 64.5GWh by 2026.

These storage additions will be used in applications such as renewable energy integration, Transmission & Distribution deferral, ancillary services, railways, microgrids, telecom, and BTM application.

Of these, BTM is likely to account for the majority, with 68-77% of the cumulative market share during the period. Inverters and telecom make up the major part of this BTM market.

This year has seen a number of important steps in India’s energy storage market, in particular given disappointing tender cancellations in 2017-18. But in February, three huge renewables tenders were announced including one for 1.2GW of solar PV combined with 3,600MWh of energy storage.

In March, further government backed support was announced in the shape of India’s Union Cabinet chaired by prime minister Narendra Modi approving the ‘National Mission on Transformative Mobility and Battery Storage’. While in July, India’s full year budget was published, and included discussion of support for lithium battery and electric vehicle manufacturing.

A Model 3 ramp-up that resulted in a quarterly profit was a sign that Tesla’s automobile business finally may be financially stable. If so, it is a good time for Tesla to turn its attention to the energy business — encompassing solar and energy storage — that has for long taken a backseat to getting the electric vehicle assembly line in order.

Elon Musk has been broadcasting this message since Tesla reported a surprise profit in the third quarter. On the call with Wall Street analysts after the earnings in November, the Tesla CEO said, “For almost two years we had to divert a tremendous amount of resources.”

Now Musk claims Tesla is poised for “the really crazy growth for as far into the future as I can imagine. … It would be difficult to overstate the degree to which Tesla Energy is going to be a major part of Tesla’s activity in the future,” he said.

Never one to shy away from bold claims or ambitions, Musk said Tesla Energy could grow to roughly the same size as Tesla’s automotive business, and solar would grow, on a percentage basis, the fastest of any, with storage second.

“I think both over time will grow faster than automotive,” Musk said. “They’re starting from a smaller base.” He added, “I think, especially, if you look at sort of — if you look at, like, year-over-year growth, it will be absolutely incredible … over the course of, say, a year, gigantic increase.”

In a recent internal email to Tesla employees, Musk outlined two critical year-end priorities: delivering all cars to their customers and boosting the rate of solar deployments by a significant degree.

Skeptics point to a variety of other reasons why Musk may be in solar- and energy-business salesman mode, beyond the Model 3 inflection point. The solar business has in recent years been associated with more negative than positive news. Tesla faces a lawsuit from shareholders over its controversial 2016 purchase of SolarCity; the solar roof that Musk has been touting for years is off to a slow start; its solar panel plant in Buffalo, New York, has been dogged by issues; and its solar business has faced unfavorable customer-service reviews.

Century-old electric technology company GE kicked off 2019 with yet another reorg.

The workhorse Power division was split up, to start. Though still a top supplier of the world’s natural-gas turbines, the division had turned into a money-loser as renewables adoption surged. Meanwhile, an expanded Renewable Energy division materialized with some 40,000 employees and billions of dollars in revenue. And GE’s up-and-coming energy storage business took up residence in that new division under the Renewable Energy Hybrids brand.

Previously, energy storage had nestled under Power, and before that it lived in the ill-fated Current unit, catering to commercial energy services. Years earlier GE tried and then abandoned a sodium-nickel-chloride battery manufacturing play called Durathon.

As the first year under the new arrangement draws to a close, GTM sat down with GE Renewable Energy Hybrid Solutions CEO Prakash Chandra to hear how the industrial giant is leveraging energy storage to grapple with a changing energy market.

“There’s never been a lack of commitment to storage,” Chandra said. “I think we’ve tried to muddle through what is the best way to play in the space so we can add the most value in the entire value chain of storage.”

The Durathon effort, which looks quixotic from today’s perspective, developed as an effort to turn GE locomotives into diesel electric hybrids. Since then, Chandra said, the company has come to appreciate the importance of being battery-agnostic and positioning itself to adapt as the battery supply chain evolves.

Now GE has taken up the mantle of system integrator, using its electrical equipment know-how to vet all the components in the containerized Reservoir product and backstop its system performance.

“This is where you provide the performance guarantees; this is where you wrap everything up,” he said. “This is what customers will come to you for and stay with you for over 20 years. You need companies that can stick around for another 20 years to be able to provide these wraps.”

GE’s longevity speaks for itself, even if its energy storage business has shifted every few years. But the company also hopes to differentiate itself based on its experience in developing power electronics and its historical leadership in gas turbines.

Remember hows gasmobiles were a luxury item until the Ford Model T came along? No? Well anyways, electric vehicles are closing in on a similar tipping point. The sticking point is the cost of an EV battery, which remains stubbornly high compared to, say, the cost of a gas tank. That’s about to change, and the US Energy Department has the lowdown on new energy storage technology that will help vault EVs into the affordable mainstream.

Energy Storage & Electric Vehicles
To be clear, comparing the cost of energy storage technology with the cost of an empty gas tank does not provide a full picture of the true cost of owning an electric vehicle.

Back in 2013, Edmunds took a look at the Chevy Volt and found that the true cost of ownership over five years — including fuel and maintenance as well as the price of the vehicle — shaved thousands off the retail price compared to a gasmobile.

That’s partly because EV fuel is less expensive, especially if you play your EV charging card right.

The other part of the cost-cutting equation is maintenance and repair, because electric drive requires less of that compared to gasmobiles (the Volt has a gas tank but runs on electric drive).

Depending on the manufacturer, adding resale value to the equation can also bring the five-year cost of EV ownership down to parity — or better — with a gasmobile. One recent study compared a Tesla model 3 to a Toyota Camry and guess who came out on top?

Three EV Energy Storage Technologies To Watch…
With the true cost of ownership in mind, let’s take a look at the four emerging battery technologies that the Energy Department is eyeballing.

Gerbrand Ceder, a battery researcher at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, provided a rundown on them last week.

For starters, he favors replacing the cobalt and nickel currently used in lithium-ion batteries with iron or manganese.

Aside from the potential for reducing costs, eliminating cobalt would free the EV supply chain from human rights issues associated with cobalt mining in some parts of the world.

Ceder foresees that technology hitting the shelves in about five or six years.

Solid-state is another type of technology that could launch into the market in about five years. Rather than using a flammable liquid electrolyte, these batteries are based on a solid, inflammable material.

That safety advantage would help lower costs, by eliminating the need to engineer extra systems into the battery. Cutting out the extra systems will also help improve battery range, by reducing weight and leaving more space for the energy storage components (to be clear, modern lithium-ion batteries have proven to be safe when properly engineered).

Annual deployments of energy storage resources in the United States have increased nearly tenfold since 2014, from only 62 MW in 2014 to nearly 500 MW expected for 2019. The big question is whether the nascent energy storage industry will be able to continue its current trajectory of rapid growth. All signs indicate that it will do so, and utility-scale “in front of the meter” energy storage procurements are a key reason why.

Here’s what you need to know about energy storage procurement trends.

The scale of energy storage procurements has increased tremendously as utilities have acquired a better understanding of how the technology can be used and the price of the technology has dropped. Energy storage helps to make renewable generation more valuable by storing the energy until it is required, and it makes the grid more resilient.

State and federal policies continue to point toward further opportunities for large energy storage projects. At the federal level, FERC’s Order No. 841 will expand market opportunities for energy storage resources beyond regulation and ancillary service products. At the state level, more than 20 states and the District of Columbia have taken actions to promote energy storage growth, ranging from utility procurement targets to storage development incentives.

Utilities typically procure new resources through a two-stage request for proposal or request for offer (RFO) process. In the first stage of an RFO, a utility will solicit bids that meet certain defined parameters published by the utility. In the second stage, the utility will select the most competitive bids for its “short list.” Bidders on the short list are typically invited to negotiate definitive documentation and, assuming the parties can come to an agreement on price and terms, a bidder will be awarded a contract for a new project.

Utilities will typically contract for energy storage resources through power purchase agreements; engineering, procurement, and construction agreements; or build-own-transfer agreements. While the procurement process for energy storage resources is the same as the process for conventional and renewable generation resources, the delivery timeframes can be shorter and the auctions more heavily subscribed given the shorter construction timeframe and simpler permitting requirements for battery energy storage projects compared to conventional and renewable generation.

Utilities and developers will encounter many of the same issues in an energy storage solicitation that they would in any other competitive solicitation for generation resources, including the rules and drivers for the competitive process, the utility’s potential cost comparisons to alternative resources, and the policy and reliability considerations of state regulators. In addition, however, energy storage resources have unique characteristics that will impact the structure of a solicitation.

Widely deployed energy storage is still a relatively new entrant onto the grid, and the rules with respect to energy storage remain in flux. As a result, long-term power purchase agreements may include provisions that address change-in-law risks.

Annual deployments of energy storage resources in the United States have increased nearly tenfold since 2014, from only 62 MW in 2014 to nearly 500 MW expected for 2019. The big question is whether the nascent energy storage industry will be able to continue its current trajectory of rapid growth. All signs indicate that it will do so, and utility-scale “in front of the meter” energy storage procurements are a key reason why.

Here’s what you need to know about energy storage procurement trends.

• The scale of energy storage procurements has increased tremendously as utilities have acquired a better understanding of how the technology can be used and the price of the technology has dropped. Energy storage helps to make renewable generation more valuable by storing the energy until it is required, and it makes the grid more resilient.
• State and federal policies continue to point toward further opportunities for large energy storage projects. At the federal level, FERC’s Order No. 841 will expand market opportunities for energy storage resources beyond regulation and ancillary service products. At the state level, more than 20 states and the District of Columbia have taken actions to promote energy storage growth, ranging from utility procurement targets to storage development incentives.
• Utilities typically procure new resources through a two-stage request for proposal or request for offer (RFO) process. In the first stage of an RFO, a utility will solicit bids that meet certain defined parameters published by the utility. In the second stage, the utility will select the most competitive bids for its “short list.” Bidders on the short list are typically invited to negotiate definitive documentation and, assuming the parties can come to an agreement on price and terms, a bidder will be awarded a contract for a new project.
• Utilities will typically contract for energy storage resources through power purchase agreements; engineering, procurement, and construction agreements; or build-own-transfer agreements. While the procurement process for energy storage resources is the same as the process for conventional and renewable generation resources, the delivery timeframes can be shorter and the auctions more heavily subscribed given the shorter construction timeframe and simpler permitting requirements for battery energy storage projects compared to conventional and renewable generation.
• Utilities and developers will encounter many of the same issues in an energy storage solicitation that they would in any other competitive solicitation for generation resources, including the rules and drivers for the competitive process, the utility’s potential cost comparisons to alternative resources, and the policy and reliability considerations of state regulators. In addition, however, energy storage resources have unique characteristics that will impact the structure of a solicitation.
• Widely deployed energy storage is still a relatively new entrant onto the grid, and the rules with respect to energy storage remain in flux. As a result, long-term power purchase agreements may include provisions that address change-in-law risks.

There’s a lot of energy storage work to keep up with in California. There are regulatory shifts allowing net metered DC coupled solar+storage and adjusting how large energy storage can stack revenue. As well of course, the California home mandate pushing grid connected and manageable energy storage. Throw in an aggressive push away from fossils as well fires, and we have thousands of small scale solar+storage project requests, a home energy storage battery boom, utilities seeking large installs of large volumes of storage real fast, and record priced deals. And at the end of this, the state does see solar+storage domination.

On Wednesday, a new proposal was submitted by the California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) to shift 63% of 2020 to 2024 ratepayer collections for energy storage within the Self Generation Incentive Program (SGIP), towards an Equity Resiliency program. The purpose of the program is to support energy storage deployment in locations with critical resilience needs and specified “High Fire Threat Districts” (HFTD) that will bear the brunt of Power Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) events. The program is legislated to begin accepting applications no later than April 1, 2020.

A full set of high resolution maps, which the below image is cut from, can be found on this California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) website. Including among the links is an address searchable map.

The Equity Resiliency Decision defines (located on sections 6.2/6.2.2/6.2.3 starting on page 35 of the document) residential customers with critical resiliency needs as:

customers residing in a Tier 3 or Tier 2 HFTD and one of the following: (1) eligible for the equity budget; (2) eligible for the medical baseline program, as defined in D.86087, 80 CPUC 182: or, (3) a customer that has notified their utility of serious illness or condition that could become life-threatening if electricity is disconnected, as defined in D.12-03-054.18

The Equity Resiliency Decision defines non-residential customers with critical resiliency needs as those located in a Tier 3 or Tier 2 HFTD that that provide critical facilities to a community located in a Tier 3 or Tier 2 HFTD and eligible for the equity budget.

Some of these critical facilities were defined as meters directly serving grocery stores, corner stores, markets and supermarkets, if the customer has average annual gross receipts of $15 million or less, over the last three tax years, as well independent living centers, food banks, and, households that rely on electric-pump wells for their water supply.