CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION CEC’s Energy R&D Program and the Potential for Storage Technologies Electrical Energy Storage - Applications and Technology

CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION

CEC’s Energy R&D Program and the Potential for Storage Technologies

Electrical Energy Storage - Applications and Technology ConferenceSan Francisco, California

Terry Surles, Director

Public Interest Energy Research Program

California Energy Commission

April 15, 2002


GDP (2000)

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000

U.S.

Japan

Germany

U.K.

CALIFORNIA

France

China

Italy

Canada

Brazil

Mexico

GDP (2000) [trillions of U.S. dollars]

9,900

GDP (2000)


California (2000)284 TWh

US (1999)3,752 TWh

Natural GasCoal

Nuclear

Natural Gas

Nuclear

Hydro

Geothermal

Hydro

38%

12%

15%

5%

50%

15%

19%

9%

Production of Electricity by Source

RenewablesWind/Solar - 2%Biomass/waste - 2%Small hydro - 3%

Renewables - 2%Oil - 3%

Natural gas - 16%Hydro - 32%Coal - 52%Imports

23%


Peak Demand is Increasing Faster than Newly Installed Capacity

Me g

a wa t

t s

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Peak Load Growth

Capacity Additions


California Energy Perspective Previous system wasn’t broken Market power became concentrated

profits up by selling less for more

No price signal for end users Loss of momentum on demand side management

10 GWh saved by early 1990’s Restructuring derails utility DSM

1.4 GW of renewable cancelled “No need” Price was above cost to utilities

Results Demand up 0.7%, price up 130% Blackouts with 28 GW load with ~ 50 GW capacity


ISO Daily Peak LoadsJanuary 2000 - August 31, 2001

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

1/1

/00

2/1

/00

3/1

/00

4/1

/00

5/1

/00

6/1

/00

7/1

/00

8/1

/00

9/1

/00

10

/1/0

0

11

/1/0

0

12

/1/0

0

1/1

/01

2/1

/01

3/1

/01

4/1

/01

5/1

/01

6/1

/01

7/1

/01

8/1

/01

Meg

awat

ts

Summer Peak is 50%higher than rest of year

Yet blackoutsoccurred here


Average Monthly Power Plant Outages(megawatts per day)

0

1500

3000

4500

6000

7500

9000

10500

12000

13500

15000

Jan Feb Mar Apr May June Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Me

ga

wa

tts

1999 2000 2001 2002


California Energy Issues:Interdependencies

Relationship of natural gas to electricity use storage down 87% from 11/99 to 11/00 generators pass through spot gas prices $3 to $69 MBtu from 12/12/99 to 12/12/00

1-in75 year drought will cause increased gas demand 600Bcf in west, 225 Bcf in So Cal

SONGS outages reduced 1100 MW of generating capacity increase gas demand by 200 Mcfd

First cold winter in US in three years price up all over, higher in California


What Changed by Summer & Fall 2001?

CA peak demand > 40,000 MW on only 9 days FERC ordered generators to offer power FERC threatened scrutiny of outages Conservation of ~8% from publicity campaign and

higher prices Capacity additions 1/1/01 - 8/1/01 8/2/01 - 8/1/02

CA & N. Baja 3,192 MW 7,652 MW

NW, Alberta, BC 2,104 MW 4,038 MW

SW 2,331 MW 3,212 MW

7,627 MW 14,902 MW


40000

45000

50000

55000

60000

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Recession

Weather

Demand Reduction and Weather

Peak Demand

Influenced by Economics and Weather


Summer 2001 Peak Demand Reductions versus Summer 2000

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%Actual

Adjusted forweather

Adjusted forweather andeconomicactivity

Jun Jul Aug Sep


Per-capita electricity consumption, 1960–2000

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Rest of U.S.

California

(DOE and CEC data, compiled 1960–89 by Worldwatch Institute, 1990–2000 by Rocky Mountain Institute; 2000 data are preliminary; 1991–2000 population data not yet renormalized to 2000 Census findings)

California: policy really does workM

Wh

per

pers

on-y

ear


0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

End-Use/Sector

Meg

awat

ts

15% 14%

11% 11%

7% 6%

4% 4% 4% 4%

Top Ten Peak Energy Uses/Sectors

(assumes a 56,000 MW peak)


Cal ISO Daily Peak LoadsJanuary 1, 2000 - December 31, 2000

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1/1/

00

1/15

/00

1/29

/00

2/12

/00

2/26

/00

3/11

/00

3/25

/00

4/8/

00

4/22

/00

5/6/

00

5/20

/00

6/3/

00

6/17

/00

7/1/

00

7/15

/00

7/29

/00

8/12

/00

8/26

/00

9/9/

00

9/23

/00

10/7

/00

10/2

1/00

11/4

/00

11/1

8/00

12/2

/00

12/1

6/00

12/3

0/00

GW

Peak Day August 16 - 43.5 GW

Commercial AC

Residential AC

CAL ISO Daily Peak LoadsJanuary 1, 2000 - December 31, 2000


PIER Objectives: Meeting Ratepayer Needs in Near- and Long-Term

Relevance: Reliability, Safety,Quality, Cost

TangibleProducts

- near-term - perception

Externalities - environment - security

Future Choices - efficiency - distributed energy resources


Funded Program Areas to January 2002 (in millions)

Supply $82Renewables, EPAG

Demand $50Buildings, Ind/Ag/Water

$48Systems Integration, Environmental


Reasons for PIER Interest in Storage Technologies

Need to be responsive to the end-user and system needs Need to have tools for mitigating energy problems Newer emerging storage technologies that hold promise Demonstration for acceptance and integration into electricity

system CA’s needs present an opportunity for storage technologies

ranging from less than a second for power quality oriented applications to several hours of energy as customer and system level backup

Deregulation of energy made manifest the costs of instability and blackouts thus increasing the value of storage technologies


PX Constrained Price in Northern CaliforniaJanuary 2000 to December 2000

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

$/M

Wh

Average Retail Rate

ISO Price Cap

PX Prices

January February March April May June July August Sept. October November Dec.


CA Real Time Electricity PriceDaily Variations

For March 11, 2002 (California ISO)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

Time of day [hours]

Ele

ctri

city

pri

ce [

$/M

Wh

]

Storage charging

Storagedischarging

~ $

50/

MW

h


California’s Future Storage Technology Portfolio Must Address Certain Issues

Industrial Need for increased reliability Need for improved power quality due to increased use of digital

controls in industry

System Support Manage transmission and distribution instability caused by

congestion Overcome transmission bottlenecks caused by limited

transmission capacity

Distributed Generation Improve dispatchability and reliability of intermittent renewables Create load-following capability for fuel cells


Emerging Technologies for Funding Consideration

Short-Term Power Quality Supermagnetic energy storage (SMES) High-speed flywheels for short-term power Ultracapacitors

Load management and reliability Low-speed flywheels Modular pumped-hydro energy storage Advanced batteries


Developing Storage Technologies for Intermittent Renewables is a Mechanism for

Improving Electricity Systems Value Increase overall capacity factor Meet ISO’s need to better schedule power that

meets demand Enable wind park operators the ability to provide

reasonable day-ahead bids to ISO Allow wind to act as a dispatchable resource as

tied to new predictive models


Example: CEC Cofunded Development of the AFS Trinity Advanced Flywheel System

Distributed generation load following, cold start and islanding for fuel cells, microturbines and natural gas engine gensets

Industrial power management chip fab tools light rail transit electronic power distribution voltage stability

Power quality/UPS alternative to lead-acid batteries


Attributes for Addressing State Issues

Program Integration

Balanced Technology Portfolio-Temporal-Technology-Risk

TechnologyPartnerships- Universities- Industry- Federal

Focus onCalifornia- Specific to State needs


$0

$10

$20

$30

$40

$50

$ M

illio

ns

CEC

DOE

State Funded R&D Programs Result in Collaboratively-Funded Programs with U.S.

Department of Energy

Current Collaborative Programs

Renewables

Efficiency Small-scale Fossil

Systems &

Environment


Next Steps for CEC Storage Technology R&D

Establish criteria for targeted, programmatic solicitation

Develop solicitation for storage applications in partnership with DOE and industry

Aim for 2-3 demonstrations of emerging technologies

Documents

CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION CEC’s Energy R&D Program and the Potential for Storage Technologies Electrical Energy Storage - Applications and Technology