Under current policies, residential batteries increase emissions in most cases

Optimizing battery use to minimize emissions is possible, but generally overly expensive.

Megan Geuss – 12/28/2018, 4:59 PM

A Tesla Powerwall 2.A Tesla Powerwall 2.

A Tesla Powerwall 2.

Another year, another reason to take the promises of residential home batteries with a grain of salt.

This month, a group of researchers from the University of California San Diego (UCSD) published a paper in Environmental Science and Technology reporting that there are very few cases in which operating a residential home battery reduces overall emissions—assuming that households are economically rational and trying to minimize costs.

Of course, if the battery is only discharged during periods of peak emissions and only charged when fossil fuel use is low, then a household might reduce emissions. But across 16 representative regions, operating a battery this way ended up being costly.

The results are similar to those published in Nature Energy in the beginning of 2017, although that study looked at a narrower region (99 homes in Texas) and modeled different battery software configurations.

The UCSD study looks at representative homes under 16 different utilities across the country. Each utility has its own emissions profile and unique demand requirements (depending on the weather in the region). The study also looked at three different configuration possibilities:

  1. A demand-shifting configuration, where the battery is used to minimize costs when electricity rates vary by time of day;
  2. A solar self-consumption configuration, where the user has solar panels and wants to maximize the amount of energy they get from those panels; and
  3. An energy arbitrage configuration, where the residential battery owner can buy and sell electricity at retail rates depending on what’s cheaper at the moment.
Further Reading

Want to minimize your home’s carbon footprint? Go for solar, forget the battery

All of these configurations are a little futuristic but still representative of shifts that are happening in the electricity industry today. While most people don’t have time-of-use pricing, it’s becoming more common (this author’s household is charged time-of-use pricing) and it will become the mandatory rate structure for many households in California in 2019. While most solar panel owners prefer not to maximize self-consumption because it’s more cost-efficient to sell electricity back to utilities under net metering, utilities have been pushing back on requirements to buy back solar power from residential customers. The energy arbitrage configuration is the most futuristic, and “reflects the vision of advocates of decentralized energy management,” according to the researchers.

Environmental Science and Technology

The researchers found that the only way to reliably decrease emissions using batteries is if utilities incorporate a “Social Cost of Carbon” into their pricing schemes—that is, charging people extra for using electricity during carbon-heavy periods of generation. This helps bring batteries into the emissions-reducing fold. Unfortunately, including a cost for carbon dioxide emissions has proven politically difficult.

Read the full story here

Environmental Science and Technology, 2018. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b03834  (About DOIs).

HT/Latitude

via Watts Up With That?

http://bit.ly/2ApvNTU

January 1, 2019 at 04:03PM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: