723
Views
69
Downloads
1
Crossref
N/A
WoS
0
Scopus
N/A
CSCD
Lithium-ion batteries are becoming critical flexibility assets in future electric power systems. Batteries can arbitrage price differences in wholesale electricity markets to make a profit while at the same time reducing total system operating costs and improving renewable energy integration. However, lithium-ion batteries have a limited lifetime due to capacity degradation, and one battery pack can only make a limited profit before reaching its end-of-life. In this paper, we screen the profit potential of Lithium iron phosphate (LFP), nickel manganese cobalt (NMC), and lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxides (NCA) batteries in all nine wholesale electricity markets in North America. We apply a systematic dynamic valuation framework that finds the highest revenue potential for the considered lithium-ion battery project subjecting to its degradation mechanism, while the degradation model used in the valuation is derived based on real lab test data over varying cycle conditions. The study found that battery valuation depends largely on battery technology and storage duration and varies across operational locations. Moreover, the study revealed that calendar life has a greater impact on battery valuation than cycle life for an 8-years calendar life scenario while cycle life shows greater impact for a 15-year calendar life scenario for all battery technologies. This impact is more pronounced in LFP than in NMC and NCA. The study recommends battery operators consider strategies that would maximize a longer cycle life or calendar life usage of a battery as this would accumulate higher profits over its lifetime.
Lithium-ion batteries are becoming critical flexibility assets in future electric power systems. Batteries can arbitrage price differences in wholesale electricity markets to make a profit while at the same time reducing total system operating costs and improving renewable energy integration. However, lithium-ion batteries have a limited lifetime due to capacity degradation, and one battery pack can only make a limited profit before reaching its end-of-life. In this paper, we screen the profit potential of Lithium iron phosphate (LFP), nickel manganese cobalt (NMC), and lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxides (NCA) batteries in all nine wholesale electricity markets in North America. We apply a systematic dynamic valuation framework that finds the highest revenue potential for the considered lithium-ion battery project subjecting to its degradation mechanism, while the degradation model used in the valuation is derived based on real lab test data over varying cycle conditions. The study found that battery valuation depends largely on battery technology and storage duration and varies across operational locations. Moreover, the study revealed that calendar life has a greater impact on battery valuation than cycle life for an 8-years calendar life scenario while cycle life shows greater impact for a 15-year calendar life scenario for all battery technologies. This impact is more pronounced in LFP than in NMC and NCA. The study recommends battery operators consider strategies that would maximize a longer cycle life or calendar life usage of a battery as this would accumulate higher profits over its lifetime.
Jayadev, G., Leibowicz, B. D., Kutanoglu, E. (2020). U.S. electricity infrastructure of the future: Generation and transmission pathways through 2050. Applied Energy, 260: 114267.
Xu, B. L., Shi, Y. Y., Kirschen, D. S., Zhang, B. S. (2018). Optimal battery participation in frequency regulation markets. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 33: 6715–6725.
Liu, J. Q., Hu, C., Kimber, A., Wang, Z. Y. (2020). Uses, cost-benefit analysis, and markets of energy storage systems for electric grid applications. Journal of Energy Storage, 32: 101731.
Nykvist, B., Nilsson, M. (2015). Rapidly falling costs of battery packs for electric vehicles. Nature Climate Change, 5: 329–332.
He, G. N., Chen, Q. X., Moutis, P., Kar, S., Whitacre, J. F. (2018). An intertemporal decision framework for electrochemical energy storage management. Nature Energy, 3: 404–412.
Mayyas, A., Chadly, A., Amer, S. T., Azar, E. (2022). Economics of the Li-ion batteries and reversible fuel cells as energy storage systems when coupled with dynamic electricity pricing schemes. Energy, 239: 121941.
Tan, X. Q., Wu, Y., Tsang, D. H. K. (2016). Pareto optimal operation of distributed battery energy storage systems for energy arbitrage under dynamic pricing. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 27: 2103–2115.
Fares, R. L., Webber, M. E. (2018). What are the tradeoffs between battery energy storage cycle life and calendar life in the energy arbitrage application. Journal of Energy Storage, 16: 37–45.
Vykhodtsev, A. V., Jang, D., Wang, Q., Rosehart, W., Zareipour, H. (2022). A review of modelling approaches to characterize lithium-ion battery energy storage systems in techno-economic analyses of power systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 166: 112584.
Bhatt, A., Ongsakul, W., Madhu, M. N. (2022). Optimal technoeconomic feasibility study of net-zero carbon emission microgrid integrating second-life battery energy storage system. Energy Conversion and Management, 266: 115825.
Pudjianto, D., Strbac, G. (2022). Whole system value of long-duration electricity storage in systems with high penetration of renewables. iEnergy, 1: 114–123.
Zakeri, B., Syri, S. (2015). Electrical energy storage systems: A comparative life cycle cost analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 42: 569–596.
Rosewater, D. M., Copp, D. A., Nguyen, T. A., Byrne, R. H., Santoso, S. (2019). Battery energy storage models for optimal control. IEEE Access, 7: 178357–178391.
Tran, M. K., DaCosta, A., Mevawalla, A., Panchal, S., Fowler, M. (2021). Comparative study of equivalent circuit models performance in four common lithium-ion batteries: LFP, NMC, LMO, NCA. Batteries, 7: 51.
Vetter, J., Novák, P., Wagner, M. R., Veit, C., Möller, K. C., Besenhard, J. O., Winter, M., Wohlfahrt-Mehrens, M., Vogler, C., Hammouche, A. (2005). Ageing mechanisms in lithium-ion batteries. Journal of power sources, 147(1-2): 1131–1140.
Xu, B., Oudalov, A., Ulbig, A., Andersson, G., Kirschen, D. S. (2016). Modeling of lithiumion battery degradation for cell life assessment. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 9: 1131–1140.
Zafirakis, D., Chalvatzis, K. J., Baiocchi, G., Daskalakis, G. (2016). The value of arbitrage for energy storage: Evidence from European electricity markets. Applied Energy, 184: 971–986.
Lakiotis, V. G., Simoglou, C. K., Bakirtzis, A. G. (2022). A methodological approach for assessing the value of energy storage in the power system operation by mid-term simulation. Journal of Energy Storage, 49: 104066.
Braff, W. A., Mueller, J. M., Trancik, J. E. (2016). Value of storage technologies for wind and solar energy. Nature Climate Change, 6: 964–969.
Figueiredo, F. C., Flynn, P. C., Cabral, E. A. (2006). The economics of energy storage in 14 deregulated power markets. Energy Studies Review, 14: 131.
Arciniegas, L. M., Hittinger, E. (2018). Tradeoffs between revenue and emissions in energy storage operation. Energy, 143: 1–11.
Sarker, M. R., Murbach, M. D., Schwartz, D. T., Ortega-Vazquez, M. A. (2017). Optimal operation of a battery energy storage system: Trade-off between grid economics and storage health. Electric Power Systems Research, 152: 342–349.
Pudjianto, D., Aunedi, M., Djapic, P., Strbac, G. (2013). Whole-systems assessment of the value of energy storage in low-carbon electricity systems. IEEE Transactions on smart grid, 5: 1098–1109.
Reniers, J. M., Mulder, G., Howey, D. A. (2019). Review and performance comparison of mechanicalchemical degradation models for lithium-ion batteries. Journal of the Electrochemical Society, 166: A3189.
Byrne, R. H., Nguyen, T. A., Copp, D. A., Chalamala, B. R., Gyuk, I. (2017). Energy management and optimization methods for grid energy storage systems. IEEE Access, 6: 13231–13260.
Qiu, T., Xu, B., Wang, Y., Dvorkin, Y., Kirschen, D. S. (2016). Stochastic multistage coplanning of transmission expansion and energy storage. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 32: 643–651.
Xu, B., Wang, Y., Dvorkin, Y., Fernández-Blanco, R., Silva-Monroy, C. A., Watson, J. P., Kirschen, D. S. (2017). Scalable planning for energy storage in energy and reserve markets. IEEE Transactions on Power systems, 32: 4515–4527.
Dvorkin, Y., Fernández-Blanco, R., Wang, Y., Xu, B., Kirschen, D. S., Pandžić, H., Watson, J. P., Silva-Monroy, C. A. (2017). Co-planning of investments in transmission and merchant energy storage. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 33: 245–256.
Hassan, A., Dvorkin, Y. (2018). Energy storage siting and sizing in coordinated distribution and transmission systems. IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, 9: 1692–1701.
Krishnamurthy, D., Uckun, C., Zhou, Z., Thimmapuram, P. R., Botterud, A. (2017). Energy storage arbitrage under day-ahead and real-time price uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 33: 84–93.
Kwon, K. B., Zhu, H. (2022). Reinforcement learning-based optimal battery control under cycle-based degradation cost. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 13: 4909–4917.
Walawalkar, R., Apt, J., Mancini, R. (2007). Economics of electric energy storage for energy arbitrage and regulation in New York. Energy Policy, 35: 2558–2568.
Reniers, J. M., Mulder, G., Howey, D. A. (2021). Unlocking extra value from grid batteries using advanced models. Journal of Power Sources, 487: 229355.
Reniers, J. M., Mulder, G., Ober-Blöbaum, S., Howey, D. A. (2018). Improving optimal control of gridconnected lithium-ion batteries through more accurate battery and degradation modelling. Journal of Power Sources, 379: 91–102.
Foggo, B., Yu, N. P. (2018). Improved battery storage valuation through degradation reduction. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 9: 5721–5732.
Yu, N. P., Foggo, B. (2017). Stochastic valuation of energy storage in wholesale power markets. Energy Economics, 64: 177–185.
Dvorkin, Y., Fernandez-Blanco, R., Kirschen, D. S., Pandžić, H., Watson, J. P., Silva-Monroy, C. A. (2016). Ensuring profitability of energy storage. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 32: 611–623.
Xu, B. (2022). Dynamic valuation of battery lifetime. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 37: 2177–2186.
Preger, Y., Barkholtz, M. H., Fresquez, A, Campbell, L. D., Juba, W. B., Romàn-Kustas, J., Ferreira, S. R., Chalamala, B. (2020). Degradation of commercial lithium-ion cells as a function of chemistry and cycling conditions. Journal of The Electrochemical Society, 167: 120532.
Saxena, S., Xing, Y. J., Kwon, D., Pecht, M. (2019). Accelerated degradation model for C-rate loading of lithium-ion batteries. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 107: 438–445.
Ahmadi, L., Fowler, M., Young, S. B., Fraser, R. A., Gaffney, B., Walker, S. B. (2014). Energy efficiency of Li-ion battery packs re-used in stationary power applications. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 8: 9–17.
Yang, F., Wang, D., Zhao, Y., Tsui K. L., Bae, J. S. (2018). A study of the relationship between coulombic efficiency and capacity degradation of commercial lithium-ion batteries. Energy, 145: 486–495.
Sarasketa-Zabala, E., Gandiaga, I., Martinez-Laserna, E., Rodriguez-Martinez, L. M., Villarreal, I. (2015). Cycle ageing analysis of a lifepo4/graphite cell with dynamic model validations: Towards realistic lifetime predictions. Journal of Power Sources, 275: 573–587.
Keil, P. Schuster, F. S., Wilhelm, J., Travi, J., Hauser, A., Karl, C. R., Jossen, A. (2016). Calendar aging of lithium-ion batteries. Journal of The Electrochemical Society, 163: A1872.
Eddahech, A., Briat, O., Vinassa, J. M. (2015). Performance comparison of four lithium-ion battery technologies under calendar aging. Energy, 84: 542–550.
Xu, B. L., Zhao, J. Y., Zheng, T. X., Litvinov, E., Kirschen, D. S. (2018). Factoring the cycle aging cost of batteries participating in electricity markets. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 33: 2248–2259.
Copyright: by the author(s). The articles published in this open access journal are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).