We don’t want energy storage

Ian Marchant

Ian Marchant FEI, Immediate Past President

Claiming that we don’t want energy storage seems like a provocative thing to say. For example, the Energy Institute (EI)’s 2015 Energy Barometer report, a survey of professionals in the energy industry, rated storage as the area most in need of innovation. My point isn’t that energy storage isn’t important; it is. My point is that, of itself, it’s not something we actually want. You don’t hear people say that what they want for Christmas is just some simple energy storage along with some socks and a chocolate orange!! In thinking about the technicalities of energy storage we should first think about what we actually want and I believe we want two things: RESILIENCE and FLEXIBILITY.

Let me illustrate with the energy storage that most of us are familiar with, even if we don’t recognise it as such; the fuel in the tank of our car. The typical fuel tank holds 50 to 60 litres of fuel that gives us both instant flexibility even on a cold morning (modern cars are so good at starting nowadays) and a couple of weeks worth of resilience assuming average mileage. Indeed, if we knew there was a supply crunch most of us could probably stretch that full tank for a month or so by car sharing, using public transport and the like.

So that unseen energy storage which comes free when you buy a car and only ties up £50 to £60 in fuel gives us a lot of resilience and flexibility in our mobility. The energy system that has evolved over the last hundred years or so has embedded within it quite a lot of hidden resilience and flexibility. As well as our car fuel tanks we have petrol and diesel at filling stations and tank farms, we have piles of coal at our diminishing number of coal-fired powers stations and we have natural gas in the network of pipes, in dedicated storage facilities like Rough and Hornsea and offshore where at some fields production can be ramped up quite quickly.

However, the energy world is changing. We need to decarbonise our electricity system and then the rest of our energy system. This second stage is likely to increase the role of electricity in meeting our heating and transport needs. The problems are that firstly our current electricity system only has embedded in it the resilience and flexibility that the current uses of electricity needs, and secondly what little already exists is in decline principally as old coal stations shut.  This is exacerbated by the fact that  low carbon forms of energy, be they renewables, nuclear or clean fossil fuels, are not currently known for their inherent flexibility or resilience. So we will be faced with less of what we need just when we start needing more. What will happen when our electric car battery needs to be recharged at the same time as our heat pump needs to work and we want all our lights and gadgets to function but it’s a still calm night?

This is the reason why so many energy professionals put energy storage at the top of their innovation agenda. In deciding on where that innovation should be targeted we need to think about what level in the electricity system we can best provide resilience and flexibility. There are four possible levels: the source of demand (our home for example); the local area (think of the transformer at the end of your street); the generator itself; or the grid as a whole. The answer may be a combination of all four levels and, importantly, may be different for resilience than it is for flexibility. It will be determined by things like economies of scale, the efficiency of sharing the capabilities with others (we don’t all need to meet our own maximum flexibility – if we can pool with others then the flexibility needs of the system will be less than the sum of all the individual needs) and the value of providing security close to demand. I have a hunch that the answer may involve local or even domestic level resilience and generator or grid level flexibility but time will tell.

Debate about energy storage tends to get dominated right from the start about technology, be it batteries, phase change material or pumped storage hydro. However, we need to separately assess our current and future needs for resilience and flexibility, then decide at what level in the system that need can be most efficiently met and only then determine the choice of technology. We have to put needs before technology.

5 thoughts on “We don’t want energy storage

  1. Ian, one matter that struck me that was ‘missing’ from the piece was the way storage could be useful to stop wasting energy. When we create masses of electricity to meet the peak demand, we then have way too much, when we’ve all gone to bed and we need ways of mopping it up. The use of pumped storage eg at Dinorwig does the job but battery charging at times of insufficient demand could be used to balance out demand, without the waste.

    We have developed battery storage in LED Lighting (with help of Smart grant).
    The technology is a superfast solution to Grid energy balancing during periods of peak and low demand and is predictable, instantaneous and undetectable. It monitors Grid frequency and switches to and from battery operation to take and place pressure off and on the Grid.

    CO2 emissions are reduced as fossil fuel standby are not needed as reserve.

    The technology has the potential to unlock new regular income revenues :
    • By using Grid power at low demand times to re-charge batteries.
    • By going off Grid and using battery power at peak demand times.
    • Re-selling any unused pre-purchased energy.
    Capacity needs of new buildings can be lowered.

    The light stays on if there’s a power cut, creating safer workplaces.

    I look forward to hearing your views.


  2. Pat Swords says:


    If your Institute, for which you are a Past President, could present a rational, balanced and properly thought out basis for this ‘decarbonisation’, I would take you and your members seriously. Unfortunately I do not have much time for what are solely belief systems, based on an appalling lack of critical evaluation and social responsibilities to others. See for instance such a critical evaluation and social responsibility:



    In reality, the people you are critising above; many of them are more knowledgeable and educated on the issue than you and your membership are. Furthermore, their concerns are highly valid in relation to the huge impacts, both financial and environmental, which are associated with this appalling ‘decarbonisation’ and the various ill conceived and non-legally compliant projects associated with it.


  3. At last, a wider discussion about resilience and flexibility of demand and supply, rather than energy storage, which has become the a discussion focused purely on electricity storage.

    I think some lessons can be learnt from Denmark, where sustained investment in onshore wind power and good international interconnectors means that Denmark has become an exporter of energy to its neighbours in Germany and Scandinavia.(see http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/10/denmark-wind-windfarm-power-exceed-electricity-demand). In return Denmark has access to Norwegian and Swedish hydro-electricity when demand cannot be supplied internally.

    District heating networks provide heat for most of the buildings in Denmark. As electricity prices drop towards zero, smaller heat suppliers using CHP stop generating and switch to electric boilers to take advantage of low prices.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s