The Hornsdale Power Reserve, HPR, battery system, 100 MW/129 MWh, in Australia, was the largest battery in the world in 2017. It is located near a 315-MW, French-owned wind turbine plant.


In 2017, various capital costs of the system were mentioned. About 1.5 y later, documents revealed the turnkey capital cost was about 56 million euros, about US$ 66 million, or 66 million/129,000 = $512/kWh; this was a low price, because Tesla was eager to obtain the contract. The URLs show the turnkey capital cost and an aerial photo of the system on a 10-acre site.



- It is important to specify battery capacities, such as the capacity of 100 MW/129 MWh for the HPR. One without the other makes no sense.
- Prices of just the batteries is one thing, turnkey capital cost of an entire system is quite another.
- Tesla had to airship the entire Tesla supply from the US to Australia to comply with tight schedules.


Modes of Operation


The HPR revenues are derived from its primary functions, which are:


- The FCAS market, i.e., grid regulation. The battery rapidly performs small charging/discharging to help maintain grid frequency within narrow ranges, as specified by the grid operator. This service provides most of the revenues.

- Daily charging when wholesale prices are low, daily discharging when wholesale prices are high, a.k.a., arbitrage. This service provides a minor part of the revenues. See URL.


If called on by the grid operator, the battery may serve to:

- Help mitigate the effects of load-shedding blackouts.
- Help provide stability to the grid during times when other generators are started, during times when sudden wind output decreases occur, or during times other network issues occur.


This chart shows cumulative net charge/discharge of the battery vs flows on the Heywood interconnector and the regional reference price (the actual flows on the battery are the rate of change of the cumulative position, which reveals losses in the system as it increases to a multiple of the capacity over the period). At the time, Heywood was thermally limited to 600 MW import, 500 MW export.


This chart shows the output from the Hornsdale wind plant and the charge/discharge of the battery (both as flows, and cumulatively)


It is evident HPR is not used to stabilize/smooth the highly variable wind plant output. It is primarily used for response to frequency deviations on the grid – the so-called FCAS market – a service which provides its day-to-day income.


Because the battery spends a significant portion of its effort on grid frequency support, it performs small charging/discharging, 24/7/365, but, at the same time, it performs daily major charging/discharging for arbitrage purposes.


Annual Revenues


Reneweconomy has some analysis that benefits from some insider revenue information not available to the public. See URLs


Annual Operating Costs


A detailed spreadsheet analysis of the cash flow of HPR was not made for this article, because of a lack of public information. Various items of information would be required, such as:


- Return on Investment: Investors likely would require a return on investment of at about 10% per year.


- Bank Loan Interest: Bank loans likely would be at about 4% to 5% for 15 years. If $40 million were bank loans, amortizing at 5% per year for 15 years would require annual payments to the bank of $3.8 million per year.


- Battery Life time: The life of the battery system would be about 15 years


- Battery Degradation: There would be battery degradation due to aging and use, i.e., more resistance to charging, less storage capacity, more resistance to discharging, which would be affected by the average level of daily throughput.


- Battery Charging/Discharging Loss: Battery charging/discharging loss in year 1 would be about 18%, on a high voltage AC to high voltage AC basis; higher in subsequent years.


- Other Costs: Other costs would occur, such as for insurance, maintenance, operation, and HVAC of the batteries, which need to be kept at about 70F for best operation and longer life.


- Direct and Indirect Subsidies: There would be financial benefits to owners from indirect subsidies, such as accelerated depreciation under MARCS (in the US), deduction bank loan interest, etc., and from direct subsidies, such as federal investment tax credit, FTC, state investment tax credit, STC, waiving of sales taxes, waiving of property taxes, etc. See Appendix.





This URL shows wind and solar prices per kWh would be at least 45% to 55% higher without subsidies, and they would be even higher, if the costs of other items were properly allocated to the owners of wind and solar projects, instead of shifted to others. See below section High Levels of Wind and Solar Require Energy Storage.


This URL shows about 2/3 of the financial value of a wind project is due to direct and indirect subsidies, and the other 1/3 is due to electricity sales.


An owner of a wind and/or a solar project, looking to shelter taxable income from other businesses, is allowed to depreciate in 6 years almost the entire cost of a wind and solar project under the IRS scheme called Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System, MARCS; the normal period for other forms of utility depreciation is about 20 years


Then, with help of Wall Street financial wizardry from financial tax shelter advisers, such as BNEF*, JPMorgan, etc., the owner sells the project to a new owner who is allowed to depreciate almost his entire cost all over again.

Loss of Federal and State Tax Revenues: The IRS estimated the loss of tax revenues to the federal government for the 5y period of 2017 - 2021. See “Energy” heading in URL

The next report would be for the 2018 - 2022 period


The indirect largesse, mostly for wind and solar plants^ that produce expensive, variable/intermittent electricity, does not show up in electric rates. It likely is offset by taxes and added to the federal debt.


* BNEF is Bloomberg New Energy Finance, owned by the pro-RE former Mayor Bloomberg of New York, which provides financial services to the wealthy of the world, including providing them with tax avoidance schemes.


Warren Buffett Quote: "I will do anything that is basically covered by the law to reduce Berkshire's tax rate," Buffet told an audience in Omaha, Nebraska recently. "For example, on wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That's the only reason to build them. They don't make sense without the tax credit."






Views: 655


You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!

Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine

Comment by John F. Hussey on April 9, 2019 at 5:07pm

Smart people build the batteries and FOOLS are stupid enough to buy them thinking they're GREEN!


Maine as Third World Country:

CMP Transmission Rate Skyrockets 19.6% Due to Wind Power


Click here to read how the Maine ratepayer has been sold down the river by the Angus King cabal.

Maine Center For Public Interest Reporting – Three Part Series: A CRITICAL LOOK AT MAINE’S WIND ACT


(excerpts) From Part 1 – On Maine’s Wind Law “Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine if the law’s goals were met." . – Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, August 2010 Part 2 – On Wind and Oil Yet using wind energy doesn’t lower dependence on imported foreign oil. That’s because the majority of imported oil in Maine is used for heating and transportation. And switching our dependence from foreign oil to Maine-produced electricity isn’t likely to happen very soon, says Bartlett. “Right now, people can’t switch to electric cars and heating – if they did, we’d be in trouble.” So was one of the fundamental premises of the task force false, or at least misleading?" Part 3 – On Wind-Required New Transmission Lines Finally, the building of enormous, high-voltage transmission lines that the regional electricity system operator says are required to move substantial amounts of wind power to markets south of Maine was never even discussed by the task force – an omission that Mills said will come to haunt the state.“If you try to put 2,500 or 3,000 megawatts in northern or eastern Maine – oh, my god, try to build the transmission!” said Mills. “It’s not just the towers, it’s the lines – that’s when I begin to think that the goal is a little farfetched.”

Not yet a member?

Sign up today and lend your voice and presence to the steadily rising tide that will soon sweep the scourge of useless and wretched turbines from our beloved Maine countryside. For many of us, our little pieces of paradise have been hard won. Did the carpetbaggers think they could simply steal them from us?

We have the facts on our side. We have the truth on our side. All we need now is YOU.

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

 -- Mahatma Gandhi

"It's not whether you get knocked down: it's whether you get up."
Vince Lombardi 

Task Force membership is free. Please sign up today!

Hannah Pingree on the Maine expedited wind law

Hannah Pingree - Director of Maine's Office of Innovation and the Future

"Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine."

© 2022   Created by Webmaster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service