Dominion Dips Toe into Battery Storage

by James A. Bacon

Last week Dominion Energy announced a slew of new solar and energy-storage projects, which it describes as a “significant step” toward achieving the net-zero carbon goals for Virginia’s electric grid under the Virginia Clean Energy Act.

The proposed investments include 11 utility-scale projects, two small-scale distributed solar projects, one combined solar and energy-storage project, and one stand-alone energy storage project. Aside from receiving State Corporation Commission approval, the projects will require state environmental permits and local zoning approval.

Once in operation, the projects will be able to provide 1,000 megawatts of electricity, or roughly enough to power 250,000 homes at peak output. Dominion said the package of projects would add $1.13 to the typical residential customer’s monthly bill.

Dominion’s announcement raises questions. If utility-scale solar is the most economical form of electricity generation, how come rates will be going up?

Part of the answer hinges on the words highlighted above, “at peak output.” Solar generates the cheapest electricity on the planet — when the sun is shining. But the sun sets with fair regularity — at least it has for the past four billion years — and sometimes these things called clouds block the sun’s rays. Therefore, Dominion must maintain electric generating capacity to provide electricity when the sun isn’t shining.

What’s interesting in this proposed package is that Dominion will acquire some electric-storage backup. Dominion is dipping its toe into battery storage. It appears to be adopting the same strategy as it did with its earliest, small-scale solar projects of setting up pilot plants to see how they integrate into the electric grid.

In this package, Dominion wants to set up a combined solar/battery storage project and a stand-alone battery storage project. The Dry Bridge Storage project in Chesterfield County will generate up to 20 megawatts, while the Dulles Solar and Storage project in Loudoun County will generate 100 megawatts of solar and provide 50 of storage.

The announcement does not break out the cost of the battery storage. But solar + battery storage gives us a truer cost to the electric system, which must create redundancy in order to maintain reliability, than calculating the stand-alone cost per kilowatt at the solar-panel level. Hopefully, the SCC will hold hearings that allow the public to gain keener insight into the economic of solar, battery storage and the full system costs of solar.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

43 responses to “Dominion Dips Toe into Battery Storage”

  1. dick dyas Avatar

    I wonder what we will do with all these gadgets after we introduce fusion energy, nationwide?

  2. Scott A. Surovell Avatar
    Scott A. Surovell

    Their investment was because of my legislation stating that 2700 MW of storage was in the public interest:

    https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?201+sum+SB632

    Storage is key to a renewable grid and we need to create the market conditions to incentivize the private sector to figure out the best technologies. There are many different possibilities.

    1. vicnicholls Avatar
      vicnicholls

      @scottasurovell:disqus
      Senator, what about the cost to regular folks? The Dems put in the PIPP and we aint seeing that Dominion is getting ruled by the SRC as it should to give us back anything. Rising rates and taking from what little we have for others who made lifestyle choices that are a problem for many, we just can’t keep supporting.

      1. Scott A. Surovell Avatar
        Scott A. Surovell

        The SCC is charged with reviewing costs.

        Historically, the Commission has taken a very narrow view of cost and only looked at dollars and cents associated with a particular project instead of costs to society.

        For example, when the pandemic hit in China and pollution vanished for a few months, they estimated that it prevented 50-70,000 premature deaths.

        https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/17/health/china-air-pollution-coronavirus-deaths-intl/index.html

        Air pollution has been causing significant health effects for decades and none of that is ever built into the cost of coal/natural gas emissions when it was evaluated versus solar.

        Likewise, when the SCC refused to approve utility undergrounding costs in the first couple iterations, they never looked at the downstream societal costs of people losing power or parts of the system taking longer to get back up because workers are focused on stringing the same lines back up all the time.

        With all technologies, costs come down. The levelized cost of utility scale solar has gone from $0.28/GW to $0.6/GW in 11 years and they are projecting to cut that by 50% in 2030:

        https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/sunshot-2030

        The same will happen with storage technology over time and we have no time to lose.

        1. Stephen Haner Avatar
          Stephen Haner

          The air pollution in question was not CO2, Senator. Mostly tailpipe. Most of that storage will never happen, the technology is not where advocates claim it is.

          1. Scott A. Surovell Avatar
            Scott A. Surovell

            Steve – Fair point, but it helps to show how much more we could save if we got other emissions down as well.

        2. DJRippert Avatar

          “With all technologies, costs come down.”

          Not really.

          The US Bureau of Labor Statistics tracks prices for broad categories of goods over time.

          The long term price trends for electronic goods and services measures the cost of those goods and services over the past 18 years.

          Of the seven categories measured, only cable and satellite television and radio service went up. +75% over the past 18 years.

          Why?

          Too much political interference, regulation, gamesmanship and special interest legislation to promote effective competition.

          Sound familiar when you think of Dominion?

        3. The levelized cost of utility scale solar has gone from $0.28/GW to $0.6/GW in 11 years…

          Perhaps you meant $0.06/GW?

          Otherwise, it is the opposite of a reduction.

          1. Scott A. Surovell Avatar
            Scott A. Surovell

            Yes – sorry. $0.06/GW

          2. William O'Keefe Avatar
            William O’Keefe

            Senator, air pollution standards are set with a margin of safety to protect the most sensitive. Unless Virginia has been in non-compliance, our air quality is not the cause of serious respiratory illnesses.
            How do you plan to accommodate new technology, such as small modular nuclear reactors or natural gas combined with carbon capture that may be less costly and more reliable than this gigantic wind farm twenty years hence?

          3. Scott A. Surovell Avatar
            Scott A. Surovell

            Not so sure about that.

            Some studies say air pollution results in 5-10% of premature deaths:

            https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-1983-8

            Other studies says air particulate pollution has correlated with reduced cognitive function which would also reduce economic productivity:

            https://freakonomics.com/podcast/pollution-brain/

            We’ll deal with changes as things change.

          4. William O'Keefe Avatar
            William O’Keefe

            The claims about premature deaths are very suspect because of the limitations of epidemiology and confounding variables.
            Once Dominion has sunk several billion into its wind farm. it will be very hard for it or the GA to walk away. My question is why didn’t you take a phased approach that recognized learning by doing. Emission goals could have been set for 10 year intervals allowing Dominion to figure the best way to achieve them. Net zero drove imprudent decision making.

          5. Heh. Air pollution has declined dramatically over the past 50 to 60 years. I haven’t noticed any gain in cognitive function in the past two generations!

          6. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Google “Flynn Effect”

          7. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
            energyNOW_Fan

            So coal burning makes particulates, SOx, NOx, and possibly diesel trucks have some particulates, not to mention tire particulates ending up in the polar ice. The first question is: is the Nature report true, and if so what is source of the issue? Not natural gas, not cars. Last few years I realize we have many American liberal studies trying to to publish papers saying the tiniest traces are pollution are deadly, but not everyone is buying the bias.

        4. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
          energyNOW_Fan

          I would agree coal burning potentially has significant health impacts. After that is not clear what the Dems are talking about about health impacts. Basically Dems just saying serious health impacts should be assumed and acted on accordingly.

          PS- I still like hybrid cars

          1. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            I think plug-in hybrids are even better. Especially if they have enough range that you can do most of your driving without using the gas engine.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar

            so why do you think that? Is it environmental or financial?

          3. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            Both.

          4. LarrytheG Avatar

            same here.

  3. Cassie Gentry Avatar
    Cassie Gentry

    Solar+ wind+battery storage equals one gigantic boondoggle. malinvestment on an epic scale. 15 or so years ago it was all about biofuels, which mostly slithered away leaving its legacy of ethanol which is too juicy a subsidy to the farm lobby to be abandoned despite its uselessness as an energy independence panacea.

  4. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “…,at least it has for the past four billion years…”

    I think the “least” figure would be more like 6000 years if some sects are to be believed…

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      October 23, 4004 BC if I recall Bishop Ussher’s calculations… 🙂 Those dinosaurs came and went in an eyeblink (Genesis Flood got them…)

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        I bought some Himalayan Pink Salt in a grinder from CostCo. On the label it claimed that it was 250 million years in the ground. The container has an expiration date of 02/2024. Dang, they dug that $#!t up just in time!

        1. how_it_works Avatar
          how_it_works

          I bought some OEM (from the dealer) manual transmission fluid for a car I own. I wanted to change the “lifetime” fluid.

          This “lifetime” fluid comes in a bottle with an expiration date stamped on the bottom.

          So in the bottle, on the shelf. it expires, but it’s “lifetime” when installed in the transmission…

          1. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Like people, I suppose, exercise is the secret to longevity.

  5. LarrytheG Avatar

    When/if storage technology gets to a point where solar+storage is as cheap as gas , the game changes.

    How fast is technology happening? How many years has it been since modern cell phones and hybrid vehicles have come online?

    How much technology will happen in the next 10-20 years?

  6. There is a need to evaluate the pros and cons / costs and benefits of solar power in light of the overall lifecycle costs of producing, installing, maintaining, replacing, and disposing of solar panels. Some of the issues were mentioned (with hypertext links to references) in “Solar Panels in Virginia: A Primer” (December 5, 2020) posted at https://www.baconsrebellion.com/solar-panels-in-virginia-a-legal-primer

    And, for a recent discussion of the issue of replacement and disposal of solar panels see the article “The Dark Side of Solar Power,” Harvard Business Review (June 18, 2021) at https://hbr.org/2021/06/the-dark-side-of-solar-power

  7. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    I love it! The nearly dead bitching about the timeline for destruction that we have wrought and the new fangled contraptions of the next generation!

    That which existed before a man turns 21, has been, always shall be, and is a gift from God.
    That which is created when a man is between 21 and 45, is the clever work of the greatest generation.
    That which is created after a man is 45, is an aberration, abhorrent to God, and the work of the Devil.

  8. tmtfairfax Avatar

    What a piece of crap. $1.13 per month for every residential customer for 250,000 homes. No sensible investor would buy into this.

    I’ve worked with the FCC for decades, including both Democratic and Republican commissioners. I cannot think of one who believed the government makes good economic decisions. What holds true for telecommunications holds true for energy. The General Assembly, be they Republicans or Democrats, don’t know what is a good investment, especially when ratepayers are footing the bill.

    The General Assembly should not mandate technology. It has no qualifications to do so. Deciding that battery storage is in the public interest should be made by the VSCC not legislators that take money or receive endorsements from interest groups, for-profit and nonprofit alike. Regulated utilities should make proposals to the VSCC, which can be considered in accordance with the law, including challenges by customers. The costs and benefits of proposals need to be determined within the administrative and regulatory litigation processes.

    Virginia’s utility regulation laws are among the worst in the country. Why? Because the General Assembly has made decisions that should be made by the VSCC.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      I’m looking at the technology “mandates” that Congress has done over the years from taking lead out of gasoline and paints and pipes to mileage standards for vehicles to wastewater plant standards to power plant technology – there’s a LOT of it.. I just scratched the surface!

      The private sector drives change but the govt sets standards based on what technology is available.

      Without the govt the air quality in our urban areas would be terrible – and our rivers cesspools not unlike other countries that don’t set standards and mandate technology.

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Don’t forget the internet and the FCC. I mean here we sit complaining and discussing government reulations on devices with standards and protocols that meet government regulations and laws, even to some content. Kiddy porn, anyone?

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          Indeed:

          ” Internet Assigned Numbers Authority IANA
          Founded 1988; 33 years ago
          Founder U.S. Federal Government
          Focus Manage DNS root zones
          Location
          Playa Vista, California,
          United States
          Owner ICANN

        2. tmtfairfax Avatar

          Internet standards are not set by the FCC. They are set by accredited standards bodies. So are all telecommunications standards.

          IANA is a part of ICANN, which is no longer affiliated with the United States government.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar

            Yep. The point is that the US initiated the standards – it took government to do it. And now it’s in the hands of a world authority but again – it took government to set it up initially just like it takes the FCC to lead on other communications issues and standards.

          2. tmtfairfax Avatar

            Larry, here’s a real life example. The 1984 Bell System breakup brought about full-fledged competition in long distance. To do this, customers must be enabled to place calls over their preferred long distance carrier, e.g., AT&T, Sprint or MCI, by dialing the digit “1.” However, every single end office switch was made to send any call beginning with the digit “1” to AT&T.

            Initially, the Bell Operating Companies and GTE were ordered to modify their switches to allow for customers to pick their preferred long distance company and to reach that carrier by dialing “1.” The standards (the how to) was not developed by the FCC. Rather, Bell Labs and the switch manufacturers, chiefly Western Electric, devised ways to modify electronic end office switches to accommodate equal access.

            Some other switches, including the mechanical Step-by-Step switches, could not be modified to provide equal access. (They had no capacity to store dialed digits, which made it impossible for the switch to consult a database to determine the identity of the customer’s preferred long distance carrier.)
            Customers served by those switches could not have 1+ dialing for any other carrier than AT&T. One solution was to replace the old switch with an electronic one. But that was costly.

            Telephone engineers developed a plan whereby the Step-by-Step switches would be supplemented by additional equipment at a higher level switch (a tandem switch) that they subtended. The additional equipment provided the technology that enabled customers to have equal access.

            The FCC, in no part, set the standard or provide the specific solution. It merely evaluated the proposal, subject to notice and comment procedures, and ultimately determined that “centralized equal access” was in the public interest.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar

            yep. Not arguing that the govt mandates a particular technology but they mandate something that technology has to provide.

            So my example is what happens when a customer changes providers and wants to keep his old number which companies originally used to discourage people from switching providers (competition) by saying the technology to do that – did not exist and the govt would not take than answer as true and forced companies to figure out what technology to use to make it work.

          4. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            All of them?

          5. LarrytheG Avatar

            I don’t know about all – but a lot of them and even standards that are promulgated in the private sector often end up driving/informing Federal rules…

            There are many engineering standards that are that way.

            The Government does not often or usually promulgate standards based on federal govt employees with no background in the field.

            Instead, the govt has qualified people in it’s ranks and they work with professionals in the private sector to promulgate standards AND almost always, those standards go out as draft/proposed – for comment before they get formalized.

  9. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Wow! Groundbreaking! Or, would be if it hadn’t been done before. Hell, it’s just another power supply to smooth the bumps in the generate/use cycle. Your computer has a power supply plugged into the wall, so why not just rip out all those wasted capacitors?

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      No matter what it is, if “liberals” support it – the right must oppose it. Of course, years after implemented and the clear benefit it provides, as has happened over years, the right will say “we” did it and “oh by the way we really didn’t need to do it then or now”…

      😉

      If we listened to the right on these issues, we’d be like most other 3rd world countries with terrible air and water quality.

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Well, well. Censored! Must’ve been the mention of Cleek’s Law on a Conservative website. Or, Little Miss Can’t-Be-Wrong. Maybe, just maybe, I meant John Kerry, James.

        Speaking of GOP. Did ya see the Border Patrol whipping black folks? Some of the apologists here will be dreaming tonight.

Leave a Reply