Australia in danger of missing out on solar thermal and storage

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

IEA report says global capacity for solar thermal could more than treble in next five years, with focus on China, Chile, Morocco and South Africa.

share
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Despite both the Coalition and Labor parties coming to the election with statements of support for solar thermal and storage technologies, particularly solar towers, it seems that Australia remains in danger of missing out on being a front-runner in the technology.

The latest mid-term renewable energy outlook document from the International Energy Agency says China, Chile, Morocco and South Africa are likely to take a lead in solar thermal developments in the next five years. There is no mention of Australia.

tonopah

The IEA says there are currently about 4.6GW of large-scale solar thermal projects in the world, around half of them in Spain, which led early development. Over the next five years, it sees an additional 6.4GW of solar thermal – nearly all of it with storage – although this figure could nearly double in its “accelerated” deployment scenario.

The leading companies are SolarReserve, ACWA Power, Brightsource Energy and Abengoa Solar, although the latter is still fighting its way out of bankruptcy, causing most of its projects to be delayed.

Two of the companies are, or have been, active in Australia. SolarReserve has outlined plans for one, and possibly as many six, large-scale solar tower and storage projects, while Abengoa has had to withdraw from a planned pilot facility in Western Australia because of its financial difficulties.

The solar thermal market was set to take off a few years ago, but got shunted aside by the stunning falls in the cost of solar PV. Now, as the penetration of variable renewable energy sources such as wind and solar PV increases, attention is again turning to storage, and to solar thermal plants.

“Despite being a small market, CSP remains a proven renewable technology that provides flexibility benefits to power grids, especially when integrated with thermal storage,” the IEA says in its report.

“The technology’s output can then follow closely the electricity demand profile during the day in regions with high direct normal irradiance (“clear skies”) and provide firm peak, intermediate or base-load capacity.”

Several proposals have been put forward for South Australia, which has among the highest rates of variable wind and solar in the world (more than 40 per cent), although the state government appears intent on issuing contracts to gas-fired generators rather than turning to new technologies.

The IEA says advanced molten storage, once considered a novelty, is now a “standard concept.” It cites SolarReserve’s 110MW solar tower and molten salt storage facility in Nevada, and its planned 260 MW plant (with 14 hours of storage) utilising similar technology in Chile.

“In emerging markets, storage remains critical, driven by the need to meet evening peak demand in countries such as South Africa, where regulators approved at least a half- dozen CSP plants with storage.

“In northern Chile, reliable electricity from CSP can be combined with large-scale PV to deliver base-load power, a requirement for the country’s large mining industry.”

It says costs are also falling rapidly, and will further reduce as the finance market becomes more familiar with the technology, although costs vary considerably depending on location, the size of the solar field and storage component, and local labour and financing costs.

Furthermore, the perception remains that CSP, and its more complex designs, is regarded as an emerging technology, adding the higher financing cost of a demonstration as a factor in LCOE analysis. It is expected that greater standardisation of plant design and equipment as markets mature will drive investment costs down over the medium term.

The 150 MW NOOR III solar tower, with eight hours of storage, will cost around $US150/MWh), while in South Africa, a base price of $US120/MWh was made for the 100MW Redstone CSP tower project with 12 hours of storage to be built by ACWA and SolarReserve.

China, which aims to have 10GW of solar thermal with storage, has canvassed an initial feed-in tariff of $US180/MWh to get project underway.

South Africa, which entered the CSP market in 2015 with the 100MW KaXu Solar One plant with three hours of storage, is expected to install an additional 600MW of CSP, all with storage thanks to the country’s excellent solar resources and supportive government policy.

Morocco’s CSP capacity is expected to expand by 660MW over the medium term and China is expected to install 3.1GW of its 10GW target in the medium term, and most of the projects over 100MW including several hours of storage.

Chile’s CSP capacity is expected to reach 615MW by 2021, driven heavily by the advantage that storage provides to base-load energy supplies for the mining operations in the north of the country. It says storage will be an attractive component driving CSP in Chile as planned projects average over 12 hours.

SolarReserve’s 260 MW Copiapo plant with 14 hours of storage (expected to be commissioned in 2019) will combine CSP and solar PV to provide round-the-clock power for the mining industry.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

7 Comments
  1. Peter F 3 years ago

    There is a strong argument that most of the storage should be located as close to the load as possible or at least at grid congestion points. If batteries get down to $150-250/kWhr for large scale and $500 behind the meter then solar + wind + batteries may well have a lower cost and higher system reliability than large scale CST plants.

    If we miss out on CST because of the rise of PV + batteries then that is not a bad thing. The point is to get a reliable grid at lowest possible cost to the consumer

    • Gary Rowbottom 3 years ago

      I would think countries particularly like China, that make most of the PV and probably batteries too, would have considered where prices were going – and they have still allocated a share for CST. The build and ongoing Australian jobs needs to be fully accounted for in the value calculation too. PV and batteries will secure a big share of future energy mix I do not doubt, but its storage costs are multiples of CST/molten salt. Maybe PV/batteries will catch up, maybe it won’t.

      • solarguy 3 years ago

        Yes mate, hard to beat molten salt storage @$134.00/kwh built and falling.

    • solarguy 3 years ago

      In a 100% renewable world, all forms of storage will be important for the grid.
      Currently molten salt storage is $134.00/kwh and descending. CST offers twice the power output for the same land area as PV.

      • Peter F 3 years ago

        I probably didn’t make myself clear. I am not against CST.
        But there are many cases where solar PV + batteries can be cheaper. Overall about 55-60% of the demand can be supplied direct from the PV without batteries involved at all. Second battery prices are falling very rapidly. The Zinth system claims US 7c/kW.hr (A$100/MW.hr) The ABU Dhabi solar PV tender at A$32/MWhr gives a combined total of 55% x $32 + $(32+100)*45% = A$77/MW.hr.
        If as the investment banks are predicting there are 2,000,000 batteries behind the meter, it is reasonable to expect that many of them will be connected to VPP’s to support the grid plus Ausnet, Synergy etc are already putting in batteries at substations to reduce investment in poles and wires. These batteries will shave peak demand in some cases but if there are enough of them hydro + batteries + widely distributed wind and combined cycle gas may very well carry the load through the night at lower cost than CST.
        Batteries have the advantage that they can be charged by wind gas or hydro at times of low demand and they can minimise transmission losses and improve system reliability by being close to the load.
        CST can only offer these benefits to a very limited extent.
        A further threat to CST is dual fuel biogas/natural gas in diesel engines. The capital cost is lower they can be placed almost anywhere and they are not affected by cloudy weather

        • solarguy 3 years ago

          No I didn’t think you were against CST, but I hoped you would acknowledge the fact that molten salt storage is cheap to build, $134/kwh v’s Lifepo4 [email protected]$666/kwh made before cycling.
          Cycling MSS over 25yrs is extremely cheap, the salt doesn’t wear out, is non toxic, can be recycled 100% and doesn’t lose capacity or efficiency. Any form of energy can be used to charge it, not just CST. In addition MSS can store effective heat for up to 2 months, great for those long lasting bad weather events, if designed so. Biogas can be used for much the same purpose, but the plants are cost effective when placed close to the fuel source, e.g. sewerage treatment plants.
          These CST plants can be placed close to loads as you have said and are currently cost effective down to 20MW. The more we build the cheaper they will become.

    • Ian 3 years ago

      Peter, agreeing to your comment: In a place like South Australia where the housing stock is mostly detached and suburban, and the opportunity for roof top solar is available for almost every household or business, there will be a widespread uptake of behind the meter battery storage once battery prices drop sufficiently. If that’s the case, then there won’t be much demand for grid electricity, let alone grid energy storage. The grid will function as a supplier of last resort. ie, when localised generation and storage fails, such as times of prolonged cloudy cold weather. What good is CSP then, it’s just another solar plus storage option good for daily cycling duties but not much good for prolonged storage.

Comments are closed.

Get up to 3 quotes from pre-vetted solar (and battery) installers.