89
Germany’s battery storage boom: The largest projects (oenergetice.cz)
submitted 3 days ago by to c/europe@feddit.org
14 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 3 days ago (1 child)

What's wrong with that? The entire point of subsidies it to encourage people to do something that's not currently very economical.

Day-to-day selling of storage is extremely profitable without any subsidies already, so why should it be subsidized? The only thing blocking the addition of more day-to-day storage facilities is the process of actually applying for a grid hookup because there's simply too many people making applications (because its so profitable)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    What’s wrong with that? The entire point of subsidies it to encourage people to do something that’s not currently very economical.

    That the guidelines allow for fossil gas power plants. So basically battery storage has to compete with free power plants with maintenance also being paid by the government.

    Yes day to day selling is profitable. However dunkelflaute is about two weeks a year in Germany. If you want to do that cheaply, you could just use biomass in the current coal power plants. That can be done pretty cheaply. I know biomass has issues, but they are certainly less bad, then building new gas power plants.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago* (1 child)

    Okay, so three things here:

    1. You just changed the subject. Nothing you said there has any bearing on whether or not it's a good idea to move subsidies from day-to-day batteries towards week-scale battery storage. In fact, you complaining that they have to compete with gas plants is more of a reason to subsidize them, not less. Gas plants can't outcompete batteries on day-to-day trading anyways, with or without subsidies. It's only at the week-scale that things get competitive.

    2. We should absolutely not be burning coal instead of gas. Coal should be phased out.

    3. These gas plants do burn biomass. Germany harvests and purifies methane from biomass, and mixes it into the fossil derived gas that powerplants burn. that's one of the primary ways that biomass contributes to the grid. Also, these gas plants don't even represent an increase in overall gas plants. Older less efficient gas plants are being decomissioned and newer gas plants are replacing them.

    It's fine if you don't like the current government, I don't like them either, but this habit where people just reflexively assume that literally everything they do is stupid and evil is not helpful.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago

    You just changed the subject. Nothing you said there has any bearing on whether or not it’s a good idea to move subsidies from day-to-day batteries towards week-scale battery storage. In fact, you complaining that they have to compete with gas plants is more of a reason to subsidize them, not less. Gas plants can’t outcompete batteries on day-to-day trading anyways, with or without subsidies. It’s only at the week-scale that things get competitive.

    But they are competing with each other. The longest dunkelflaute in Germany in the last decade lasted for 1610. We are talking about 10GW of gas power plants being added(and they are being added to the current fleet and do not replace old gas power plants) That means 1610GWh of batter storage could also do the same job. Today in summer Germany is producing about 350GWh of fossil fuel electricity on a sunny day. You roughly need that to make summer nights work. That is a significant part of what is needed to survive a dunkelflaute.

    So this is at the very least gifting fossil fuel companies 2GW worth of gas power plants. Probably more since long duneklfaute is pretty rare.

    We should absolutely not be burning coal instead of gas. Coal should be phased out.

    LNG is 33% worse then coal and Germany imports a lot of that. Also building a new power plant also produces emissions. We really should do neither and pay no subsidy for any infrastructure that forces that.

    These gas plants do burn biomass. Germany harvests and purifies methane from biomass, and mixes it into the fossil derived gas that powerplants burn. that’s one of the primary ways that biomass contributes to the grid.

    Most biogas is burned at a constant rate though and it is a huge wasted potential. It is easily enough to replace a good bit of gas and it would make perfect sense to force companies to not use fossil gas, when they receive subsidies.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent