🔎 𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐦𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐍𝐄𝐌 𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐫 𝐟𝐚𝐫𝐦𝐬 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞? More and more solar farms are being developed with co-located storage, or even co-located load, in response to falling capture rates in solar-heavy markets. Co-location gives the solar farm owner more options for the energy they generate during periods of negative pricing. For existing solar farm owners that don’t already have battery storage, deciding when and how to add a co-located BESS is an important decision. It’ll depend on the commercial performance of the existing asset as well as the potential upside from the battery. To see how that looks in real life, we’ve analysed five operational solar farms in the NEM, looking at the actual commercial performance for the last 12 months and see how a battery would have changed things up. Three scenarios were modelled: ✅ Actual solar farm output and financial performance against wholesale prices ✅ Modelled solar farm performance, including with economic curtailment ✅ The addition of a 50MW / 2-hour duration BESS to the actual sites To ensure a meaningful comparison, each asset’s performance is measured by 𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐫𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐮𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐫 𝐌𝐖 𝐨𝐟 𝐠𝐫𝐢𝐝 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐜𝐚𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐲 - calculated as total revenue over the period divided by its specific grid connection size in MW. ⚡ 𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐦𝐞𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐜 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫? Grid connection capacity is a scarce, expensive resource, so once an asset is connected, how efficiently it monetises that capacity becomes a major driver of returns. 💡 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐬? ⚖️ Financial performance varies significantly during months with high levels of negative pricing. This is likely driven by a combination of commercial arrangements – PPA and LGC terms in particular – as well as operational under-performance. 🔋 The addition of storage has the potential to increase revenues by between 100% and 400% under perfect conditions. Notes: 🔹 Actual asset performance based on AEMO dispatch data and priced against the corresponding wholesale price. Each asset will have its own commercial arrangements in place that will impact behaviour during negative price events. 🔹 Modelled asset performance based on the available technical info for each asset, historical irradiance data from Solcast and assuming an LGC rate of $40 per MWh, meaning economic curtailment only occurs at prices below -$40. This largely mirrors the actual site performance. 🔹 BESS dispatch based on perfect foresight. Actual capture rates for operational BESS in the NEM are more like 60% of perfect. 🔹 Site connection limits based on observed export data in addition to published data
Do you model the impact of transmission congestion? This is substantial for a few solar farms (not on your list) who might therefore benefit the most from adding BESS.