Petrobras saves $5M per well with new pre-salt subsea equipment deployment technique
Researchers devise method to produce jet-range hydrocarbons as co-product of production of algal biodiesel; role of alkenones

Eos Energy Storage introduces grid-scale battery system at $160/kWh

Eos Energy Storage announced the commercial availability of its MW-scale Aurora system for deliveries starting in 2016. Eos’s standard Aurora 1000|4000 product, a containerized 1 MW DC battery system providing four continuous hours of discharge, offers a cost-effective energy storage solution competitive with gas peaking generation and utility distribution infrastructure. The Aurora 1000|4000 will be sold at a price of $160/kWh in volume.

The Aurora product employs Eos’s patented Znyth battery technology that uses a safe aqueous electrolyte and a novel zinc-hybrid cathode to enable extremely low-cost electricity storage and long life. Eos’s grid-scale product is designed to reliably integrate renewable energy, improve grid efficiency and resiliency, and reduce costs for utilities and consumers.

With a 30-year life, Eos is can provide peak electricity at a levelized cost of $0.12-0.17 per kWh—substantially less than conventional gas turbines and competing energy storage technologies. Source: EOS. Click to enlarge.

As Eos’s manufacturing capacity ramps up, the company expects to deploy an aggregate of 1 MW of capacity over a series of projects in 2015, beginning with Consolidated Edison and GDF SUEZ, and including a project with Pacific Gas & Electric funded by the California Energy Commission.

The Aurora system’s commercial availability will improve the competitiveness of developers bidding into the PG&E and SCE solicitations due this quarter.

A large number of inquiries regarding the California storage opportunities prompted us to make this announcement. We believe in full transparency around availability and pricing; we hope in this manner to provide the best product and the best value to our partners and customers.

—Eos President Steve Hellman

Eos is working with major power controls and integration partners to sell, install, and maintain AC-integrated battery systems through its Aegis Program, which includes Toshiba, Gamesa Electric, and others.

The program is structured such that Eos supplies the containerized DC battery and battery management system while the Aegis Partners provide the power control systems and integration layer, and take responsibility for installation, operation, and maintenance.

Eos will work with the Aegis partners to support bids into California’s energy storage RFPs and plans to announce further details of the program in the coming weeks.



If the 30 yr life and chart are true - this is a winner.


That cost sounds way better than anything lithium batteries can do for grid storage.

That's a sales price too.

' Eos will use the new money to bring that line up to what Philippe Bouchard, business development manager, described as a “megawatt-per-month production capability” over the course of the year. The startup will deliver about 1 megawatt of its DC battery systems in 2015, he said.

But “Eos’ business strategy is not to become a large global manufacturer of this technology,” he said. “There are other manufacturers better suited to that task.” To that end, the startup is in discussions with what he described as some of the “largest contracts manufacturers in the world,” in search of partners willing to replicate its production lines, and help it to reach its goal of 100 megawatts of annual capacity in 2016.'


This, combined with the plummeting cost per kWh of wind and PV electricity, is another nail in the coffin for coal. Isentropic storage is even cheaper.


REs with storage may be the final 'clean' solution at an affordable cost.

H2/FC may be another competitive solution when combined with H2 station for VFCs?


@ clett

That Isentropic storage is a neat idea. But just you wait it's only a matter of time before some troll argues something silly, like "peak" gravel or nitrogen. ;)


The floor is 12¢/kWh (the EOS site does not say whether this is storage cost or includes the price of power to charge the battery).  That's pretty steep, when wholesale baseload costs are on the order of 5¢.  When you add the full RE feed-in tariff, the wholesale price is going to have to be north of 20¢, which is far too high for many users.

Nuclear produces (not just stores) power for far less.  Kewaunee was shut down because it couldn't get contracts to sell its power for even 6¢/kWh.

If anyone cares, my analysis of the cost of power on an RE/Eos grid was posted some time ago at The Ergosphere.

David Freeman

E-P, you're looking at the wrong market. Energy storage systems are not competing with energy _production_ (e.g., nuclear), but rather with peaking simple cycle gas turbines.

In a 'srong' RE solution, the biggest bump in unmet demand comes in the four hours after peak. That's realistically achievable with batteries.

Maintaining base load for the entire night is a wholly different matter, and I don't really see how that can be achieved with battery energy storage systems. Bringing us back to nuclear... Which, of course, raises the question - why not just over-build the reactors and throttle as necessary to meet demand? The marginal costs should be minimal once you start building the power plant.


I think throttling the reactors is barking up the wrong tree; if they're loaded with enough fuel to run flat-out until the next scheduled fueling, it makes no sense at all to turn them down.  What we need is secondary uses either for electricity (e.g. pre-heating DHW) or heat itself.  Elsewhere I suggested pervaporation of water to generate anhydrous ethanol using tapped steam.  There are plenty of other uses for heat which could potentially be co-located with nuclear plants.

Nick Lyons

@E-P: Agree completely. Living in drought-stricken coastal California, the obvious use for extra heat and/or electricity is desalination. My little hamlet just installed a desalt-cum-water-reclamation plant for which the main operating expense is going to be electricity.

My fervent hope is that CA comes to its senses some day and builds more nuclear power plants and fewer wind turbines.

Nick Lyons

More on desal: the beauty of using excess energy (heat or electricity) for desal is that, unlike energy, water is eminently store-able, and extensive water storage infrastructure already exists in most developed countries. In the growing areas of the world with water security issues, desal is the future, and it dovetails perfectly with a grid that needs to cope with excess electricity or nuclear power plants that need to run flat out to best amortize their capital costs.


If I understand correctly, pervaporated water is reasonably pure (not even ethanol will go through the membranes).  That could kill two birds with one stone, producing a nearly-pure water stream from ethanol production instead of a high-BOD byproduct liquid that is not potable.


$160 per kWh rather high. May be the reason is not being mass product yet.
Pay back calculation for peak powe is complicated trick. It could inlude not only power generation but transmission and distribution cost avoidance. Usualy manafucturers do not know how utilities are calculating peak power cost. Batteries has a lot advantages due to the small scale. Power quality regulation always been the market for such products and normaly is regarded as power distribution cost.


According to the website the the batteries are capable of 10,000 cycles so that works out to 1.6 cents per cycle they have a round trip efficiency of 75% so if you buy the electricity at 8 cents per kwh you need to sell it for about 10.7 cents just to break even. The biggest cost is the capital expense. If you need to get a 10% return you need to get back $16 in your first year and if you cycle once per day that works out to 4.4 cents per day or kwh. Over time as your capital investment gets paid back you need less return. There are probably financial and technical considerations that I've overlooked but it appears reasonable that if you can buy baseload at 4 cents and sell it at 12 cents on a regular basis these batteries might be a reasonable investment. Owners of rooftop solar systems with contracts to sell back to the grid at generous rates might find these batteries of interest as well.


A few cents more to support the change over from fossil and other centralized generation methods with significant risks and unresolved issues is something that I am will to pay for. The insistence in being the cheapest while we destroy our surroundings is a false argument. The consumer is often said to be unwilling to pay these cost, but in fact they are rarely given a choice. $160/kWh is pretty good. It doesn't quite destroy the industries of degradation, but it provides a starting place. I would think that roof top solar cooperatives where communities of like minded people who have roof top solar could form local micro grids at a reasonable cost.


I admire the valuable information you offer in your articles. I will bookmark your blog and have my friends check up here often. I am quite sure they will learn lots of new stuff here than anybody else! Regards, vmware jobs in hyderabad

The comments to this entry are closed.