|
|
|
|
|
by neltnerb
747 days ago
|
|
Is this not just the same question as for decades? Which is cheaper, a peaker plant after the transmission line hitting peak capacity, or increased transmission line capacity for a small percentage of the time? Now it's just battery storage instead of natural gas peaker plants. You can still smooth out the transmission line capacity with downstream storage. Or have we already done that to the max with peaker plants and now transmission lines are running at their capacity 90% of the time? I haven't read the numbers in a while, it used to be really bad! |
|
But on the other hand, reasonable grid planning is done a decade ahead, more for some equipment. Money spent in a hurry is likely to be wasted in that business.
Storage to optimize grid (not production) cost is neither efficient nor resilient as far as I know.
Also having a peaker plant solves production peaks, not transmission limits. And nobody builds a second peaker at the other end of a line to save on grid costs. Redispatching is a thing, but it is a small optimization, not a solution to an underdeveloped grid.