16
votes
Nation's largest urban battery is being built in Daly City, California
Link information
This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.
- Title
- Nation's largest urban battery to take center stage near San Francisco
- Published
- Apr 3 2026
- Word count
- 72 words
From the article:
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
I really don't see the benefit of "on-site" power storage. The only thing the article said to justify the location being a good thing was
The power isn't being generated in the urban centre, so it needs to be shipped over many miles of transmission lines whether that's pre- or post- power storage, and a pumped hydroelectric power station seems like a far safer, more efficient, and ecologically friendly (materials for batteries are generally way more ecologically unfriendly to produce) way of providing power storage and grid balancing. The biggest pumped hydroelectric plants are in the order of 10s of GWh of storage, so seem like a far better idea to me than Tesla Megapacks - to me this had the vibe of a fluff piece justifying their usage, but maybe that's not how it comes across to someone without an electric engineering background!
Pumped hydroelectric needs a very specific terrain layout to work. There are very, very few places where its viable. There are entire regions of the country where it's not feasible because of a lack of elevation or development patterns or geology.
In contrast, you can put battery storage literally anywhere you have space. You can also continually scale its energy and power capacity over time as demand grows by just adding more units.
I don't think this sort of comparison can be made without doing detailed calculations. For example, there are limits on how much energy power lines can transmit, so time of day might matter?
Some power is generated locally (for example, residential solar), so it seems like having some local storage might be useful?
Pumped storage is good where available but geographically, it's pretty limited.
The residential solar local generation is a good point I hadn't considered!
Yeah, Daly City isn't going to have that.
Just a bit of a ramble on the topic:
I feel that many people don't understand the ebb and flow of power usage. When power is used, it must be generated immediately or otherwise have been stored, such as in a battery bank. Overnights typically less power is used, but shutting off generation isn't always feasible - especially if hydro or nuclear power is used (I know nuke's aren't a thing in CA anymore, but just stating in general). Power storage is a great thing, but I believe that we still have a long way to go before we roll out battery options like this. Unfortunately, that also means petroleum-based fuels are necessary to cover that production.
Batteries outright scare and bother me: fires are nigh eternal when they occur, and the gaining materials necessary is worse (in my opinion) than the outcomes of using natural gas or other "dirty" forms. Additionally, with the increase of "renewable" fuel sources (which have their own issues inherent in the materials required/used for producing very inefficient-but-usable power), you can't always turn the sun or wind off, so the power has to go somewhere...
Why do you think we have a long way to go before we roll out grid scale battery? I ask since we're already in the midst of that transition, the US added 19 GWh of battery storage last year and the pace is only growing. Battery + solar seems to be the cheapest and cleanest way to transition the energy system over and it's only going to get cheaper and safer.
I'm not sure I follow all the bits of the later portion of your comment, but battery fires are much less frequent and probably significantly better than either of the ongoing air pollution, CO2 emissions, or environmental catastrophes caused by fracking, oil spills, pipelines, massive human risks during transit, etc. Oil and methane (I dislike the term 'natural gas') extraction and consumption have had world changing impacts, so I'm firmly in the camp that solar and batteries are necessary and better than the status quo.
California does still have a nuclear plant. While the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant was slated to be closed by 2022, in the face of growing interest in sustainable power and a comparative fading of the anxieties regarding nuclear power it got an extension to 2030 and could well get additional extensions.
I hadn't realized Diablo Canyon has stayed open; interesting how the state is trying to unshoot its foot sometimes haha.
I work in generation as well and we got a bump up in the state until 2030 for the same reason... we also own [I think] four peakers around the Sacramento area that are literally diesel engines with zero emission restrictions.