Two subsidiaries of Arlington-based AES Corp. have begun the commercial operation of AES Laurel Mountain, in Elkins, W.Va., a 98-megawatt wind-generation facility that includes 32 megawatts of battery-based energy storage.
The project, which involves AES Wind Generation and AES Energy Storage, will supply energy and operating reserve capacity to PJM Interconnection, a Pennsylvania-based regional electrical transmission organization serving 13 states (including Virginia) and the District of Columbia.
“Energy storage technology is the silver bullet that helps resolve the variability in power demand,” Terry Boston, PJM’s president and CEO, said in a statement. “Combining wind and solar with storage provides the greatest benefit to grid operations and has the potential to achieve the greatest economic value.”
The AES Laurel Mountain storage project is the largest of its kind. Using advanced battery technology, the storage service is expected to help optimize the wind energy generated at AES Laurel Mountain. AES officials said the facility is among the first wind generators to supply operating reserve capacity to help maintain the reliability of the power grid.
AES Laurel Mountain includes 61 GE 1.6 megawatt wind turbine generators capable of a combined power generation of 97.6 megawatts. The wind turbines are mounted on 80-meter towers along a 13-mile stretch of Laurel Mountain near Elkins. The facility will supply more than 260,000 megawatt hours of energy each year to PJM.
AES Wind Generation has 1,900 megawatts in operation globally, of which nearly 1,400 megawatts are located throughout the U.S. This project is AES Wind Generation’s second wind facility serving the PJM market, following the successful completion of AES Armenia Mountain located in Pennsylvania.
It’s a good step forward for batteries, but the best option for wind in that region might end up being something like the Mount Storm Pumped Storage project proposed by Gridflex Energy nearby. It would provide more than ten times the MW capacity of the battery system, with 20+ hours of storage - far more than batteries are capable of for equivalent cost. And the battery system might have a life of 15 years (not yet proven), whereas pumped storage projects have lifetimes of 50+ years. And this particular pumped storage project - being a closed-loop system - would have minimal environmental impacts.
--Matthew Shapiro of Boise, Idaho
Oct. 28, 2011 at 01:37 PM