| ▲ | epistasis 9 hours ago | |||||||||||||
In 2025 storage is cheap too, it's just that there's no need for it until you already have a large amount of renewables. 2025 is the year that storage is really being deployed in a serious manner in the US, more than 18GW most likely: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=65964 You can see on the map at the bottom of this page that almost all the batteries are in areas that already have high amounts of renewables: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=64586 And the prevalence of batteries in Texas means that they must be cost effective, because all grid assets in Texas are from private investors risking their own capital, and there is zero incentive for batteries except for their profit generative capacity. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Closi 9 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||
> You can see on the map at the bottom of this page that almost all the batteries are in areas that already have high amounts of renewables: It could be - but the battery investments map also align with the map below which shows that these states (Texas & California) are also states suffering from blackouts. https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/power-outag... So while this could mean that storage is cheap, it could also mean 'Texas's mix and grid is unstable, particularly as it's not connected to the national grid, and this has opened the opportunity to profit from higher levels battery arbitrage that doesn't exist in a better balanced grid' | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||