To include those would mean the gas would otherwise not get produced. Not a true claim.
That is false. Comparative economics show the true economics of one alternative and another One alternative gives one the enrichment of mineral interest owners via royalties from natural gas production being extracted, and the benefits to the governments of revenues from extraction. These do not exist for renewables nor for releasing potential energy from batteries compared to hydrocarbons.
This is not a comparison of wind/solar. This is taking the place of peakers. The batteries are as easily charged at night with coal, nuke and base load Nat gas.
Nice theory, but the undenying fact is that all this battery hyperbole is generated by the incessant dialogue on promoting solar and wind energy which lacks potential energy storage unlike coal or natural gas and MUST come up with a storage system to make them compete reliably with other forms of power generation.
These batteries do not operate at the levels of charge/discharge like your phone. They do not have the volume constraint, just economic. 20 year life cycle with current technology is described in the article.
Sure, 20 year operating life may be described, but will it be realized? Typically, optimistic claims are made to see the product, before experience proves otherwise. We see this all the time in the climate change nut world.
And I bet battery replacement is not included in any of these optimistic scenarios either, just like to the suckers who get sold on purchasing EVs.
That is a massive cost if you build storage and the associated equipment unless you routinely use it depleting most of it by the end of winter.
You state this so positively. Yet we are talking about a peaker plant that runs infrequently, so demands little fuel compared to a baseload operation. I am not talking about underground storage, as perhaps some other small storage component may be feasible or even like propane.
I do not understand the question.
Battery risk and reliabilities, ie, do batteries explode? Do they always perform reliably? Are there hazards in utilization, etc.
Although they can be used with renewables, that is not the purpose here. It is a different application. Large battery systems can allow more economic use of non-dispatchable renewables, where they may generate more than demand, but the primary discussion of the article is replacing the gas peakers.
Understood. I just want a fair comparison of all aspects, which must include items such as availability of underlying battery components, in the considerations. And economics should mean a whole lot.