AbstractSeasonal mismatches between electricity supply and demand is increasing due to expanded use of wind, solar and hydropower resources, which in turn raises the interest on low-cost seasonal energy storage options. Seasonal pumped hydropower storage (SPHS) can provide long-term energy storage at a relatively low-cost and co-benefits in the form of freshwater storage capacity. We present the first estimate of the global assessment of SPHS potential, using a novel plant-siting methodology based on high-resolution topographical and hydrological data. Here we show that SPHS costs vary from 0.007 to 0.2 US$ m−1 of water stored, 1.8 to 50 US$ MWh−1 of energy stored and 370 to 600 US$ kW−1 of installed power generation. This potential is unevenly distributed with mountainous regions demonstrating significantly more potential. The estimated world energy storage capacity below a cost of 50 US$ MWh−1 is 17.3 PWh, approximately 79% of the world electricity consumption in 2017.
Metadata: Crossref. Abstracts retain their original authors’ rights.
In the conversation
Original HN comments, with labels from simple text rules. A label describes the whole comment and may miss context or irony. Read the discussion to make up your own mind. About the labels
> Pumped storage is a fine technology, but is there a lot of build potential left for it?
"A lot" is probably subjective, but the two best known global estimates are Hunt et al. (2020) [1] from IIASA and Stocks et al. from ANU re100 (who incidentally also have some interactive maps [3]) which with different cost targets put potential at 17.3 and 23 PWh respectively, which works out to about 2 MWh per person. For comparison, for the past decade, the US ahs consumed about 13 MWh of electricity per person per year, down from a peak of slightly under 14 in 2000 and 2005. With very high levels of electrification, that could potentially rise to 24 to 28 MWh per person per year,…
Read the full comment
or 8 or 9 PWh/yr for the whole country. Total primary energy use is a lot higher, around 90 MWh per person–year or 30 PWh total, this is because both not everything could be practically electrified and the things that could easily be electrified tend to be much more efficient when done electrically. Energy efficiency is also usually assumed to increase slightly in general.
The US specifically is actually above the world average at about 4.5 MWh per capita according to the ANU team's estimates. That's 1.5 PWh per year roughly. In any case, I would expect that there is likely to very likely sufficient potential in most (if not all) grids for pumped hydro to be a significant part of medium duration energy storage (if not all of it), though whether it actually would depends on the costs of other technologies as well.
[1]: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-14555-y
[2]: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2020.11.015
[3]: https://re100.eng.anu.edu.au/
Offriver closed loop pumped hydro just needs two football size fields hundreds of meter apart in elevation. Most continents have plenty of suitable locations for PHS, though they are distributed unevenly. According to the paper, there are 600k feasible locations for PHS world wide, or capacity to store 70% of global energy demand in 2017.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-14555-y
Demand shaping - Germany pioneered this by dialing aluminum smelter usage up and down in the early days. They didn't talk about it much, I think because it functioned as a kind of hidden subsidy and they didn't want to attract undue attention. There's LOTS of scope for stuff like heaters and vehicles batteries to use electricity when it's plentiful and cheap and turn it off when it's not. The UK has a special electricity tariff for this already which is very popular with electric car drivers. Demand shaping is, relative to storage, really cheap and usually gets forgotten about in skeptical renewable energy models.
Pumped storage and batteries for short term energy storage…
Read the full comment
- hours to weeks. Australia is already building one pumped storage battery which should provide them with roughly 350GWh - roughly half of the short term storage they'd need if they had a 100% solar and wind based grid. With one plant. You can't do this in, e.g. Florida but the geography to build this is more than plentiful enough in most of the world (this topic is pretty well settled: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-14555-y but for some reason people keep disputing it).
Hydrogen for seasonal storage - for weeks when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine. Roughly 2-3% of power will need to be stored this way on a 100% solar/wind grid. It's not efficient and expensive to generate hydrogen from electricity and then turn it back into electricity but still cheaper than generating and using nuclear power at the point of generation. It is cheap to store enormous amounts of power for long periods this way though.