4.8 Review

A review and probabilistic model of lifecycle costs of stationary batteries in multiple applications

期刊

RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS
卷 25, 期 -, 页码 240-250

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2013.04.023

关键词

Energy storage; Levelized costs of electricity (LCOE); Techno-economic modeling; Monte Carlo simulation; Uncertainty

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In future electricity systems with a high share of intermittent renewable power generation, battery technologies have the potential to support power quality and security. The growing scientific literature on batteries reflects the high attention that currently rests on these technologies. This paper reviews the existing literature on lifecycle costs of batteries in stationary applications. The primary result of this review is that, despite the current high degree of variance in technological and economic battery data, a systematic assessment of the underlying uncertainty is lacking. The present paper addresses this disparity with an investigation of the impact of uncertainty in input parameters on lifecycle costs of four battery technologies across six electricity system applications. Based on input data collected from literature and via expert interviews, a probabilistic techno-economic model was built that calculates lifecycle costs and systematically addresses uncertainty in input parameters by applying a Monte Carlo simulation. The main conclusion of this paper is that the present uncertainty in cost and technical parameters of batteries exceeds by far the differences in lifecycle costs across technologies. For most electricity storage applications, the absolute differences in mean lifecycle costs across technologies are negligible compared to the uncertainty ranges of the mean lifecycle costs. Therefore, a competition still exists between the four analyzed battery technologies and so far a leading technology has yet to emerge in any of the investigated applications. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据