Taxpayer Dollars Saved By Energy Storage System In Lancaster, California

November 1st, 2014 by Jake Richardson

The city of Lancaster, California, has installed an energy storage system at its Museum of Art and History. It was connected by Green Charge Networks to store energy to be used at peak times when electricity prices are high. The energy is stored up when
costs are low, and then used again later in order to avoid having to pay for expensive electricity.

“Green Charge Networks’ GreenStationTM will reduce the museum’s demand charges thus lowering their operating costs and maximizing the building’s power efficiency. Since solar-generated power is now required for new homes in the City of Lancaster, adding intelligent energy storage will save tax dollars while creating a more flexible grid that’s ready to take solar power utilization to the next level,” said Vic Shao, CEO of Green Charge Networks. (You may remember our previous coverage highlighting Lancaster’s new law requiring solar power come with all new homes.)

The following video has some more information about the museum’s energy storage system:

Half of a residential or business electric bill can be from demand charges, so the museum is expecting to save a significant amount of money by avoiding them. The energy storage system can replace the more expensive energy. Currently, energy storage systems can’t cost-effectively be relied upon heavily, but intelligent systems can use it in bursts to avoid the most costly energy charges.

An EV fast charger that can charge to 80% capacity in about 30 minutes was also installed in the parking lot behind the museum.

Lancaster has a population of about 150,000 residents and is located approximately one hour north of Los Angeles. Adding the new energy storage system and fast EV charger, as well as the strong solar requirements, are not at all the only green efforts by the city of Lancaster. It may become the first net-zero city, or at least one of the first. Mayor R. Rex Parris has outlined a vision to invest aggressively in renewable energy and reduce energy consumption. Specifically, the city has worked to very much reduce the time required to obtain solar power project permits in order to fast-track solar growth.

Of course, southern California is a great place for solar power. One of the largest solar power projects in the world is located in the Antelope Valley, which is also where Lancaster is located.

Also, two southern California counties are increasing their solar power production 600% from 2013–2015.

Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.

Tags: California, Green Charge Networks, lancaster

About the Author

Jake Richardson Hello, I have been writing online for some time, and enjoy the outdoors. If you like, you can follow me on Google Plus.

Curious George

This article is refreshingly devoid of numbers, but I would like to know two:
– What was the cost to taxpayers?
– How much do taxpayers save per month?
bink

Jake, please investigate advanced vanadium rebox battery pricing and application use before you make statements like this

“Currently, energy storage systems can’t cost-effectively be relied upon heavily, but intelligent systems can use it in bursts to avoid the most costly energy charges.”
- Larmion
  
  At current prices, vanadium redox batteries are still not cheap enough for mass storage. Jake’s statement is correct as of 2014.
  
  Vanadium batteries do have the potential for sharp price decreases though, and it seems that potential will be realized soon.
  - bink
    
    what is current pricing ? and have you calculated all the tariffs it is eligible for in California ?
    
    For instance what are the peak demand charges for this site and peak demand load? is there an opportunity for capacity payments from the utility during evening peak ? cost effective means the revenue side of the calculation needs to be included in any analysis
    
    if the school has a 4hr day peak the storage needs to cover and lithium cost is $1,600/ kWh then run the calculation with VRB at $750.00 for peak shaving and then add capacity payments for a 4hr evening peak with dispatchable generation
    
    stop making abritary statements and show me some numbers for a behind the meter application
    - Mint
      
      Businesses interested in storage don’t have a “4hr day peak”. They often have short peaks lasting 30 min or less at various times of the week. EV fast chargers need 50kW for 30 min (Tesla’s need up to 135kW for 30-60min).
      
      We don’t have prices for these systems, especially a company like Green Charge Networks whose pricing model (zero up front cost) is like that of Solar City. Your price for lithium ion stationary storage is for a one-of-a-kind pilot plant, and you’re only fooling yourself if you think that’s what the cost is going to be when these systems start selling in the thousands. All we can do is make estimates.
      
      We do know that we can currently buy Li-ion cells in bulk for $200-250/kWh, and when there’s volume production, JB Straubel of Tesla has said the rest of the power electronics are close to being $0.10/W (they mass produce 300kW 3-phase inverters for their EVs for a few grand each, so this is entirely believable).
      
      For VRB, you need to find cost per kW of the cell stack, not cost per kWh of the electrolyte, to make the case for demand charge reduction at businesses.
      
      I’ve seen utility demand charges of $5-15/kW per month. If you used 1kW continuously, the energy charge would be ~$70/mo, so demand charge wouldn’t be much. But if your business (for example, an EV fast charger) needed 50kW for 30 min at a time, but only a handful of times per month, then the demand charges could be $5k+/yr while energy charges are a fraction of that.
      
      Can you finance a 50kW VRB system for well under $5k/yr? Not if it’s 200kWh * $750/kWh.
      - bink
        
        Mint, you do not deserve a rebuttal, your ignorance around battery tech and economics is showing. When one quotes a per kWh price it equates to the cost on a per kilowatt or Capex basis as well (duh!)
        
        Secondly, the peak I refer to is the area peak or demand period (curve) which is what the businesses demand charge would be based upon. You could go across this country and your avg demand period would probably avg 4hrs. As an example Brooklyn and Queens New York demand period is 12hrs.
        
        In order to not be charged the demand charge you need to dispatch alternative generators at a specific time during the month on a specific day to catch the coincident period for your particular site.
        
        You have to cover the whole 4 or twelve hours not partial to avoid the charge.
        
        Thirdly, stop talking about cars when we are talking about grid applications, it is not the same nor is the cost of a “GRID SYSTEM” and the tolerance and robustness is not the same
      - Mint
        
        You have no idea how demand charges work on a bill.
        
        Business don’t get charged based on average demand around the country. Demand charges are based on the single highest measured power draw by your business each month over any 15 minute intervals.
        
        JB Straubel’s comments *were* about grid applications. The EV comment was a testament to his credibility, and no, grid applications are not harder than EVs. Not in flexibility of output, reliability requirements, environmental conditions, or cost sensitivity of electronics.
        
        I see you’re still chickening out from backing any of your claims with references.
      - bink
        
        Mint, what are you talking about? you really need to stop posting,
        
        “I’ve seen utility demand charges of $5-15/kW per month. If you used 1kW continuously, the energy charge would be ~$70/mo, so demand charge wouldn’t be much.”
        
        No one will be believe anything you write anymore.
        
        Of course it would not make economic sense for a business to purchase energy services if they are only using demand load of 1kW (inconvenience factor for such little savings )
        
        Nor would it be economically feasible for the energy services provider unless it were a community storage situation, where there are several customers, even then not worth the inconvenience.
        
        That is not what I am referring to, it is your deficit in knowledge about such things:
        
        $5.00 x 1kW = $5.00 for the month not $70.00 (demand charge is $5.00 per kW per month)
        
        What type of calculation did you come up with ? even at $15.00 demand charge for a demand load of 1kW for the month, it would equal, guess what ? $15.00 dollars
        
        WOW!
        
        You deploy storage where it makes economical sense and feasibility and provides a benefit to the customer. There are plenty of commercial and industrial business whose energy bills are 50, 60, 70% demand charges
      - Mint
        
        You’re an idiot. Do you not know what ‘energy’ means?
        
        1kW continuous would use ~720 kWh of electrical energy per month. That results in an energy charge of ~$70 at typical rates to businesses. Forgive me for assuming you had at least the aptitude of a 10 year old, and could figure out how many hours are in a month, then multiply by $0.10/kWh. A battery does nothing for such a business.
        
        Business interested in batteries have peaky loads. An EV fast charger seeing low usage (e.g. 40 charges a month of 18kWh) is a perfect example: 50kW peak ($250-750 demand charge), 720kWh energy (~$70). Various industrial machines also have peaky loads, especially during startup.