Very Tiny Small Minimal Program For Batteries In Germany

April 21st, 2013 by Dr. Karl-Friedrich Lenz

This article originally appeared on Lenz Blog (minor changes below).

Germany solar panels & flag via Shutterstock

Zachary Shahan already reported that Germany will start a subsidy program for batteries used with small solar power from May 1st on.

Now there has been an official news release from the German government on the matter. People will be able to get low-cost financing from the Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, the government-owned development bank. And they will get a subsidy of 30% of the battery costs. Solar PV systems up to 30 kW qualify for the program. This is for the rooftop market.

I recall that I have discussed this on March 3. As already explained, this program was supposed to start in January, and with twice the volume it now has (€50 million instead of the €25 million now available). And it was one promise the CDU/FDP government made in negotiations on a package reducing solar feed-in tariffs last year. That promise has been broken until now, and the program starting now is a very tiny small minimal effort.

€25 million is about €0.30 per capita for Germany. This stuff is important to get the transition to 100% renewable done faster, saving the World from global meltdown and annoying the enemies of Germany rooting for our failure. The level of investment here is completely inadequate.

Germany already has time slots where demand is not enough to cover the supply of renewable energy. Storing some of the supply makes more sense to me than shutting down perfectly low-carbon energy sources. Of course, the majority of storage will come from power-to-gas in the future. But that doesn’t mean batteries don’t have a place in the system as well. They sure do.

That said, having a very tiny small minimal program in place is better than nothing. So I guess this is good news in a way.

But basically we need a change of government in the coming elections. With the CDU/FDP government in charge right now, the transition to renewable will be much slower and much more expensive than with the SPD and the Greens.

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: Germany, Germany Energy Storage, Germany energy storage incentive, Germany energy storage subsidies

About the Author

Dr. Karl-Friedrich Lenz is a professor of German and European Law at Aoyama Gakuin University in Tokyo, blogging since 2003 at Lenz Blog. A free PDF file of his global warming science fiction novel "Great News" is available here.

Kevin Adams

Umm, I was right 24 days ago…

http://cleantechnica.com/2013/03/29/rooftop-solar-could-power-all-australia-homes-more/#comment-846545436
ThomasGerke

In my opinion the most significant effect of this program will be spreading awarebess about the concept of distributed storage + solar.

From what I’ve read and heared the solar market is transforming away from the feed-in-tarif into something rather like “feed-me-savings + independence”

A KfW-Program could indeed help boasting interesst & awareness, especially since such a program gives local solar companies a great reason to contact their recent clients about the new possibilities.

At the same time companies like SMA really start pushing smart residential energy solutions by cooperating with well known brands for home appliances & residential energy solutions (heating, micro-CHPs,…) .

Increasing energy self sufficiency might become a viral trend (though investment cycles in homes are sometimes abit longer)
- Dave2020
  
  I think you’re right Thomas – batteries are better off-grid and this scheme should focus on that. Batteries aren’t a good bulk storage technology.
  
  It’s probably fair to say that ALL the electrochemical options are, and always will be, non-starters for grid-scale electricity storage. Surplus peak-wind output will soon be of a different order of magnitude.
  
  Some facts about Hydropower in Norway:-
  “Total installed hydro generation capacity in Norway: 29,600 MW (2011)”
  
  Status for Pumped Storage in Norway:-
  “Few existing pumped storage plants today.”
  “Mostly for seasonal storage.”
  “No need for daily pumped storage plants today. (98% hydro)”
  
  From that, I’d assume that surplus renewable electricity from neighbouring countries is mostly consumed on the Norwegian grid and not actually put into PHS?
  
  Statkraft speculate that “50GW of Norwegian hydro (PS) capacity could make Germany 100 per cent renewable by 2050.” (What about the rest of Europe?!)
  
  If you tot up the huge Capex involved in an over-capacity of intermittent renewables, plus building the new electricity storage facilities, plus the necessary interconnectors, AND add in the high annual running costs of such a system – is that really a good idea? And power-to-gas is not any cheaper, is it? http://k.lenz.name/LB/?p=6879
  
  To my mind, there’s only one sensible solution – don’t treat the symptoms. Cure the disease of intermittent generation. It’s not so difficult. Store wind, wave and tidal energy before-generator, then the (system-wide) ‘numbers’ WILL add up, because total installed capacity could be halved, there’d be fewer grid interconnections and less storage capacity would be required. And there would be zero ’round-trip’ loss. Think about it.
  - Bill_Woods
    
    How would you store, e.g., wind energy before the generator? Connect the spinning rotor to a flywheel?
    - Dave2020
      
      The wind turbine of choice would be a floating VAWT and this is stabilised with an integral wave energy converter. The hull houses a raised-weight accumulator, which is charged by their water pumps. Stored energy density is enhanced using air pressure, to ensure the whole assembly has the ideal buoyancy.
      
      The total installed capacity of an offshore farm becomes its storage capacity, because larger, sea-bed accumulators would form a central power station platform, receiving water under pressure from, say, 100 surrounding energy harvesters.
      
      So, instead of 100 direct-drive PM generators rated at 5-7MW you’d have 4 or 5 normal high speed units at 100MW, driven by perfectly matched water turbines. This is both cheaper and an inherently more efficient engineering design. (and it saves a fortune on high voltage marine cables)
      
      The UK’s Energy Research Partnership and the European Energy Research Alliance are stuck with an orthodox perception of ‘mechanical storage’ as Hydro, Fly Wheels or Compressed Air, but these all consume electricity, as does the option they omitted – the GPM. http://www.gravitypower.net/
      
      Spending billions on generating electricity you can’t use is plain dumb. Storing surplus electricity, to be regenerated when you can use it is an expensive waste. Dispatching power to meet demand earns a premium – a high Capex on before-generator storage facilities would pay for itself, quite quickly.
      
      For more clues, see my profile.
  - http://www.facebook.com/matthew.t.peffly Matthew Todd Peffly
    
    And how do you “store wind, wave, and tide NRG before-generator” ? You going to ask the wind to wait and blow later?
James Wimberley

German politicians are learning from other countries how to design policies that fail: from the broad, long-term mandates of the EEG to penny-packet, short-term, symbolic tinkering.
globi

Given the fact that electricity prices are still higher during daytime than at night and there is no intention to introduce flexible electricity pricing, there’s really no point in introducing decentralized batteries.

Also, even though there are incentives in place to consume more electricity at night and even though PV only produces during day time, coal power plants still produce more power during day time than at night.

Lastly, it’s been mentioned that Germany would require about 20 TWh of storage (roughly a fourth of what Norway already has) for a 100% renewable powered grid. If 1 kWh of storage costs €100, Germany would need to invest €2000 billion in storage. For €2000 billion one can also purchase 2000 GW (!) of wind power.

In other words: It is simply more sensible to overbuild renewable power, introduce demand response (flexible electricity pricing) and to electrify the heating and hot water sector, than to fill up basements with (blind) batteries or to produce gas with renewable power to feed old fossil fuel furnaces.
Otis11

Well, (now this may just be my optimism) but any chance this could simply be a trial run? Using a small amount to see what changes need to be made in the future and to allow time for the storage market to ramp up to avoid unnecessary spikes in costs?

Then the program could be ramped up over the next few years until the market matures and the need for subsidies declines – allowing for a slow and controlled phase out of subsidies to leave a mature and successful storage market?

(Knowing politics, it probably is my optimism speaking more than actual probability, but unless there’s evidence to the contrary, that’s what I’m going to stick with, and support that platform…)
- http://twitter.com/Kf_Lenz Karl-Friedrich Lenz
  
  I sure hope you are right.
  
  Much of that will depend on the result of the elections coming up.