Energy 239 (2022) 121897

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Peak shaving benefit assessment considering the joint operation of

nuclear and battery energy storage power stations: Hainan case study
Xiaojiao Chen a, Liansheng Huang a, b, **, Junbo Liu c, Dongran Song c, *, Sheng Yang d
a
Institute of Plasma Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hefei, China
b
University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
c
School of Automation, Central South University, Changsha, China
d
School of Energy Science and Engineering, Central South University, Changsha, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The rapid development of battery energy storage technology provides a potential way to solve the grid
Received 12 May 2021 stability problem caused by the large-scale construction of nuclear power. Based on the case of Hainan,
Received in revised form this study analyses the economic feasibility for the joint operation of battery energy storage and nuclear
14 July 2021
power for peak shaving, and provides an effective solution framework for construction scale and battery
Accepted 24 August 2021
Available online 28 August 2021
type determination. Under the proposed framework, a novel cost model for the large-scale battery en-
ergy storage power station is proposed. Then, economic analysis is conducted to get the most economical
battery type and construction scale by considering the comprehensive economic benefit of the joint
Keywords:
Battery energy storage
operation under the limit of the load factor. On this basis, sensitivity analysis of economic indicators to
Nuclear power station control parameters and economic parameters is performed to further demonstrate the economic feasi-
Peak shaving bility of the joint operation. Comparative analysis shows that 270 MW lithium iron phosphate battery
Economic indicator energy storage power station has the best and stable comprehensive performance in terms of the IRR,
Sensitive analysis PBP and LCOE, which are 16.27%, 6.27 year and 0.464¥/kWh, respectively. In comparison with the
pumped storage, the battery energy storage has lower initial investment, faster capital recovery and
smaller floor area under the joint operation mode. Moreover, sensitivity analysis illustrates that the
large-scale application of battery energy storage still depends on the trade-off between the cost per-
formance of battery and the real-time electricity price.
© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction nuclear power generation technology, the total installed capacity

In this section, the research background of Hainan and nuclear
power is firstly introduced. Then, the literature review is per-
formed. Following that, the contribution and organization of the
work are given.
1.1. Background
With the rapid development of China's economy, the demand
for electricity is increasing day by day [1]. To meet the needs of
electricity and low carbon emissions, nuclear energy has been
largely developed in recent years [2]. With the development of
* Corresponding author.
** Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: huangls@ipp.ac.cn (L. Huang), songdongran@csu.edu.cn
(D. Song).
and unit capacity of nuclear power station are increasing. At pre-
sent, the largest nuclear power station installed capacity and the
largest single unit capacity in China are 6564 MW and 1750 MW,
respectively [3]. However, the large-scale construction and insta-
bility of nuclear energy bring about a series of power grid stability
problems, of which the peak load regulation problem is the most
prominent.
Taking Hainan as an example, according to the 13th five-year
plan and 14th five-year plan of Hainan power grid, it is estimated
that by 2026, nuclear energy will account for 24% of the total
installed capacity, and the maximum unit capacity will reach
1200 MW. After the No.3 and No.4 units of Changjiang nuclear
power station are put into operation, there will be a large gap of
peak load regulation in Hainan power grid in the short term, and
the maximum peak load regulation gap will reach 1550 MW.
Meanwhile, with the transformation of energy structure, the
development of traditional power supply such as thermal power is

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.121897
0360-5442/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al. Energy 239 (2022) 121897

restricted and cannot meet the demand of ancillary services [4]. To

No comparison and selection of construction scale
solve this problem, an energy storage system is needed to improve

Not considering the market influence on initial

power system flexibility [5]. Due to the limitation of construction

Not considering the loss cost and the market

period and environmental protection requirements, the con-
No battery type and construction scale

struction scheme of a pumped storage power station, which is

Not considering joint operation mode

Not considering joint operation mode

Not suitable for joint operation mode

Not suitable for joint operation mode
often used to improve the stability of nuclear power, is not
applicable at this time. In this context, there is an urgent need for

influence on initial capital cost

other more flexible energy storage systems to improve the sta-
bility of nuclear power.

1.2. Literature review

selection scheme

capital cost
Limitations

Traditional energy storage technology mainly includes me-

chanical energy storage and electrochemical energy storage [6].
These energy storage systems for ancillary services have been
widely concerned by clean energy research community, and
related material selection and design methods continue to be
presented in a vast number of researches. The energy storage
Life cycle cost modelling and economic analysis for
Benefit assessment system of joint operation mode
Joint optimization framework for ancillary services

technology, capacity scale, research target, contribution and lim-

Solution framework for location and construction
Techno-economic analysis under power system

itations of some existing researches are summarized in Table 1.

These researches have verified the technical and economic feasi-
Size design based on sensitivity analysis
Battery market operation modelling for

bility of these energy storage systems under various capacities,

and provided solutions for location, material and construction
scale determination. However, there are few researches on the
joint operation of energy storage system and the power station,
especially in nuclear power.
Life cycle cost modelling

At present, the utilization of the pumped storage is the main

scale determination

scheme to solve the problem of nuclear power stability, such as

ancillary services

peak shaving, frequency regulation and active power control [7].

peak shaving
Contribution

[8] has proved that the joint operation of nuclear power station
application

and pumped storage power station can peak shave more flexibly
and economically. However, due to its long construction period
and great environmental pollution, it has difficulties in urgent
peak shaving demand satisfaction and site selection [9]. In
contrast, electrochemical energy storage power station repre-
Techno-economic analysis

Techno-economic analysis

Techno-economic analysis

Techno-economic analysis

Techno-economic analysis

sented by battery energy storage has no site selection restriction

and can be installed in either the power generation, transmission,
Design optimization

Design optimization
Design optimization

distribution or consumption system [10]. Battery energy storage

Research target

systems have been widely used in the practical power system to

stabilize the output power and improve the operation efficiency
[11]. It has good performance in peak load regulation [12], fre-
quency modulation [13], demand response [14] and suppression
of renewable energy fluctuations [15]. With the energy market
Some existing researches about the energy storage technology application.

transforms, the grid structure will likely see increased reliance on

battery technology to improve its stability [16]. Meanwhile, re-
1e100 MW

1e100 MW

1e100 MW
1e100 MW

searches on the stability [17] and economic feasibility [18] of

>100 MW
Capacity

>1 MW

>1 MW

>1 MW

battery energy storage systems to replace peak power station of

commercial users are conducted, which verify that the current
installation of battery energy storage power station has economic
and technical feasibility. However, there are still a series of chal-
lenges in large-scale application of battery energy storage system.
Electrochemical energy storage

In order to analyze the economic feasibility and get the optimal

Mechanical energy storage,
Energy storage technology

construction scale and material selection scheme, an effective cost

Battery energy storage

Battery energy storage

Battery energy storage

Battery energy storage

model is essential. A life cycle cost model of energy storage system

Battery energy storge
Battery energy storge

is proposed in [19], and various energy storage systems are

Pumped storage

compared and analyzed by using the annualized storage life cycle

cost and levelized cost of energy. In [20], a detailed life cycle cost
model of lithium-ion batteries recycled from electric vehicles is
proposed, and the comparative analysis is carried out concerning
different interest-subjects in three techno-economic status. On
the basis of the established life cycle cost model [21], proposes a
sizing method with sensitivity analysis for battery-supercapacitor
[23e25]
[15,16]

[20,21]

hybrid energy storage systems, and verifies the influence of

Table 1

[13]

[14]

[21]

[22]

different factors on the system cost. Similarly, on the basis of

Ref

[9]

existing cost models, there have been a lot of studies on energy

2
X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al.
storage materials and scale design [22]. proposes a bi-level optimal
location and scale model for grid-side battery energy storage sys-
tem with coordinated planning and operation, which effectively
reduces the operation cost and loss. Based on a real time control
algorithm [23], proposes a dimensioning optimization to battery
energy storage systems used for peak shaving, which improves the
peak shaving performance of the energy storage system. In [24], the
impact of demand side management is considered, and a more
economical energy storage scale design scheme is provided for the
residential battery energy storage system.
This series of research verifies the feasibility about building
battery energy storage system for solving stability problems in
power grid, and provides an effective solution for the construction
of battery energy storage system. However, the above research
mainly focuses on the economic feasibility analysis of battery en-
ergy storage system itself. In terms of the joint operation, the
maximization of comprehensive benefits between energy storage
system and power station can not to be guaranteed. Moreover,
there is no research on economic feasibility about the joint oper-
ation between battery energy storage power station and nuclear
power for peak shaving, and the existing life cycle cost model is not
detailed and mainly focuses on small and medium-sized energy
storage system with energy storage capacity less than 100 MW. On
the other hand, due to the large single capacity and high safety
demand of nuclear power station, more constraints to be consid-
ered in the capacity design of battery energy storage power station,
are not included in the literature.
1.3. Contribution and organization
Under the background of Hainan Power Grid and considering
the shortcomings of the existing research, this study analyses the
economic feasibility of the joint operation of battery energy storage
and nuclear power for peak shaving. To do this, an effective solution
framework is proposed for battery type and construction scale
determination, considering the comprehensive profit between
battery energy storage power station and nuclear power station
and the safe operation requirements of nuclear power. On this
basis, a detailed life cycle cost model is established for economic
comparative analysis, considering the non-linear change of initial
investment and operation and maintenance cost with construction
scale caused by market competition and the cost of loss. The
comparative analysis is conducted to provide the best selection
scheme for battery energy storage power station, and to evaluate
the economic benefits between the battery energy storage and the
pumped storage under the joint operation mode. Through sensi-
tivity analysis, the economic feasibility of combined operation of
battery energy storage and nuclear power is further illustrated. The
major contributions of this study are summarized as follows:
C Based on the Hainan case study, the economic feasibility
about joint operation of battery energy storage power station
and nuclear power station for peak shaving is the first time to
be analyzed.
C A feasible solution framework for the construction scale and
battery type selection of battery energy storage power sta-
tion is proposed, which offers a new paradigm for the
planning and designing of energy storage power station
when solving stability problem caused by large-scale nuclear
power construction.
C A detailed life cycle cost model for large-scale battery energy
storage power stations is proposed, in which the cost of loss
and the impact of market competition on the investment and
operation and maintenance of the power station is
considered.
3
Energy 239 (2022) 121897
C Sensitivity of economic indicators of different types of bat-
tery energy storage power stations to control factors and
economic factors under the joint operation mode is analyzed,
and the influence of market on the application prospect of
battery energy storage is explained.
The remainder of this study is organized as follows: the case
background description and technical evaluation of energy storage
batteries are presented in section 2, and section 3 introduces the
solution framework and life cycle cost model for large-scale battery
energy storage power station construction; after that, solution
framework validation and results discussion are presented in sec-
tion 4, and section 5 finally concludes the study and gives the future
direction.
2. Case descriptions and technical evaluation of energy
storage technologies
The main work of this section is to elaborate the structure of
Hainan power grid and the peak shaving problems caused by the
construction of Changjiang nuclear power station. Then, the per-
formance is analyzed and compared among five kinds of commonly
used energy storage technologies, which include lithium battery,
lead-acid battery, liquid flow battery, super capacitor and pumped
energy.
2.1. Case descriptions
The transformation of energy structure has brought a great
challenge to Hainan power grid, especially the peak shaving
problem caused by large-scale nuclear power construction. Firstly,
the current situation of Hainan power grid is described, and then
the joint operation mode of nuclear power station and energy
storage station is analyzed based on peak shaving demand.
2.1.1. Background of Hainan Power Grid
Hainan, located in the southernmost part of China, is a tourist
city. As shown in Fig. 1, Hainan has formed a 220 kV main grid
structure around the island, but the grid structure is still weak. The
unbalanced power supply layout and less installed capacity in the
east and south, which has brought a great pressure to the grid
construction and safe operation and maintenance. Different from
the isolated island power grid, Hainan power grid has a 500 kV
external transmission channel, which is connected with the main
grid of China Southern Power Grid through Fushan substation. As a
special economic zone, Hainan province needs to undertake a lot of
import and export trade and capital introduction, which has higher
requirements for the grid infrastructure. From the perspective of
geographical structure, Hainan power grid structure has the char-
acteristics of both island power grid and large power grid branches,
which can provide reference for island city or island state power
construction. From the perspective of industrial development,
Hainan case can also provide the reference for power planning of
tourism island or economic island.
The total installed capacity of Hainan Changjiang nuclear power
phase I and II project is 3830 MW, including 130 MW nuclear power
small reactor. Although the construction of large-scale nuclear
power units can effectively solve the problem of power demand, it
also brings new challenges to the safe operation of Hainan power
grid. On the one hand, with the proportion of electricity con-
sumption of the tertiary industry and residents in Hainan Province
is rising, the load peak valley difference is expanding year by year.
The large difference of daily load rate has higher requirement for
controlling power generation, and brings great pressure for peak
load regulation of power grid. On the other hand, the single unit
X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al. Energy 239 (2022) 121897

Fig. 1. Geographic wiring diagram of Hainan Power Grid.

Table 2 and difficult site selection, the original planning of pumped storage
Summary of maximum peak shaving gap value in Hainan power system (unit: MW). power station cannot meet the urgent need of peak shaving. In
Stage 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 contrast, the construction period of battery energy storage power
station is short and there is no difficulty in site selection. Thus, it
Dry season 0 0 100 0 0 0
Flood season 0 360 40 0 0 0 can effectively solve the problem of peak load regulation.
Spring Festival period 0 530 1550 1340 1110 0
Typhoon period 0 600 300 0 0 0
2.1.2. Analysis of joint operation of nuclear power and battery
energy storage system
The joint operation mode of nuclear power and battery energy
capacity of nuclear power station accounts for a large proportion of storage power station depends on the peak load regulation de-
the whole network load, which has an important impact on the mand, and the typical daily peak shaving gap curves in 2026 and
stability of the whole Hainan power grid. 2027 are shown in Fig. 2 (a) and (b), respectively. It can be seen that
According to the load forecasting results of the 13th five-year the peak shaving gap in flood and dry seasons in 2026 and 2027 last
plan of Hainan power transmission network and the new gener- for 1e2 h each time, which determines the minimum charging and
ator planning scheme before 2030, with the commissioning of No.3 discharging time of battery energy storage power station. Mean-
and No.4 units of Changjiang nuclear power station in 2026, there while, the real-time price has a great impact on the economic
will be a large short-term peak shaving gap in Hainan power grid, benefits of battery energy storage system. According to the regu-
as shown in Table 2. The duration of spring festival and typhoon lation of Hainan power market, the on-grid price of Hainan nuclear
period is much shorter than that of dry season and flood season, power is 0.415 ¥/kWh. Table 3 shows the real-time electricity price
and the peak shaving gap can be regulated by arrange unit main- of user side in Hainan Province.
tenance. Considering the influence of nuclear power characteristics According to the predicted peak load regulation demand and
and operation experience, nuclear power units cannot participate typical daily peak regulation curve of Hainan power grid, the
in peak load regulation frequently [25]. To alleviate the peak operation mode of battery energy storage power station is deter-
shaving gap, an effective method is to build an energy storage po- mined. Before 2028, the battery energy storage power station will
wer station for joint operation. Due to the long construction period replace the nuclear power station for peak shaving. After 2028, the
4
X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al.
Fig. 2. Typical daily peak shaving gap curve in 2026 and 2027: (a) 2026; (b) 2027.
Table 3
Real-time electricity price of user side in Hainan Province.
Type Peak period
Price (¥) 1.03
Duration 10:00e12:00 16:00e22:00
battery energy storage power station will operate in the peak
shaving and valley filling mode. Considering the demand of peak
load regulation, the energy storage power station is set to fully
charge and discharge once a day during 2026 and 2027. Then, the
energy storage power station is operated at fully charge and
discharge twice a day after 2028. When calculating the revenue, the
comprehensive revenue in 2026e2027 is the sum of the revenue of
the one full charge and discharge of the energy storage power
station and the revenue of the increased power generation of the
nuclear power station. After 2028, the total revenue will be the
revenue of peak load reduction and valley filling brought by two full
charge and discharge of energy storage power station every day.
2.2. Technical evaluation of energy storage technologies
Energy storage technology is widely used in power system
auxiliary services. There are obvious differences among different
types of energy storage technologies, such as discharge depth, en-
ergy density, energy conversion efficiency, price and decay rate
[26]. The techno-economic specifications of the different energy
storage technologies used in this study are summarized below.
2.2.1. Lithium-ion batteries
With the rise of electric vehicle industry, lithium-ion batteries
represented by lithium iron phosphate batteries have developed
rapidly in recent years [27]. Due to their high energy density, light
weight, high energy conversion efficiency, operational safety and
longer life cycle (4000e8000 cycles), lithium-ion batteries are
popular in energy storage system and transportation applications.
Also, lithium-ion batteries have disadvantages such as higher en-
ergy cost and poor cycle stability [28]. The energy conversion effi-
ciency is around 90%e95%, and the discharge depth is around 85%e
90% [29].
2.2.2. Lead-acid batteries
Lead-acid battery is the oldest and the most developed battery
type, of which the advantages include low energy cost and good
performance in variable temperature range [30]. However, the
5
Energy 239 (2022) 121897
Flat period Valley period
0.6362 0.33
7:00e10:00 12:00e16:00 22:00e23:00 23:00e7:00
disadvantages of lead-acid batteries are obvious, such as low en-
ergy conversion efficiency, poor energy density and short life cycle
(500e4000 cycles). Especially, lead-acid battery is bulky and not
environment friendly, resulting in high maintenance cost. The en-
ergy conversion efficiency is around 70%e90%, and the discharge
depth is around 75%e85%.
2.2.3. Redox flow batteries
Redox flow battery is one of the flow-based batteries, which can
be used in many applications due to its independent power and
energy ratings [31]. The discharge depth of redox flow battery is
similar to that of lithium-ion battery, and redox flow battery has
higher energy conversion efficiency and longer life cycle
(1000e13000 cycles). The liquid characteristics make it have better
environmental protection and safety, but the complex operation
and maintenance, large area and high cost limit its utilization in
large-scale energy storage [32]. The energy conversion efficiency is
around 65%e85%, and the discharge depth can reach 100%.
2.2.4. Super capacitor
Super capacitor is an ideal energy storage material with high
efficiency, long cycle life (50,000þ cycles), wide working temper-
ature limit and no maintenance [33]. However, considering the
short discharge time, large internal resistance and high price of
super capacitor, it is rarely used in the actual construction of energy
storage power station. The main disadvantages of super capacitor
are low energy density and high self-discharge loss [34]. The energy
conversion efficiency of super capacitor is around 90%e97%, and
the discharge depth of super capacitor is around 90%e100%.
2.2.5. Brief analysis of comprehensive performance
The economic and technical comparison results of these energy
storage batteries are show in Table 4. It can be seen that different
types of batteries have obvious differences in economic feasibility,
efficiency and environmental protection. Despite higher battery
module price, the cycle life and efficiency of redox flow battery and
super capacitor are better than that of lithium-ion battery and lead-
acid battery. Lead-acid batteries have the worst comprehensive
X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al. Energy 239 (2022) 121897

Table 4
Economic and technical comparison of four types of energy storage batteries.

Types Advantages Restrictions

Lithium-ion battery High energy density; No perfect recovery mechanism;

Environment friendly; Poor tolerance of overcharge and discharge
Long cycle life
Lead-acid battery Low price; Low energy density;
Fast charging High cost of operation and maintenance;
Environment pollution
Redox flow battery Long cycle life; Low energy density;
Operation safety; A large area of land is needed;
Self-discharge controllable; Expensive price
Environment friendly
Super capacitor High efficiency; Short discharge time;
Long cycle life; Need to be placed smoothly;
No maintenance required; Expensive price;
Environment friendly Low energy density

performance and the lowest module price. The energy cost of these
energy storage batteries from high to low is super capacitor, redox
flow battery, lithium-ion battery and lead-acid battery. Due to the
different structural characteristics, the construction scale of energy
storage power station is greatly affected by the control parameters.
2.2.6. Technical comparison between battery energy storage and
pumped storage
At present, the pumped storage power station has been usually
used in the practical engineering construction to solve the stability
problem caused by nuclear power construction. However, with the
prices of labor, materials and fuel go upwards, expenses of reset-
tlement and land expropriation go up and the requirement of
environment protection rises in China, the pumped storage power
station investment will rise as time goes on [9]. Meanwhile, the
great progress in battery energy storage makes it have certain
technical and economic superiority than the pumped storage. The
difference of specific economic indicators between the two types of
energy storage power stations depends on the construction scale.
Some technical and economic indicators are presented in Table 5. In
terms of the technical feasibility, battery energy storage power
station has faster response speed, higher comprehensive system
efficiency and stable improvement to nuclear load factor. Mean-
while, battery energy storage power station has lower construction
cost, and the cost can be further reduced. Moreover, the battery
energy storage power station has less impact on the environment
and is more flexible.
3. Methodology
In this section, a solution framework for battery energy storage
power station construction scale and battery type selection is
proposed, considering the safe operational constraints of nuclear
power units and the comprehensive economic benefits between
battery energy storage power station and nuclear power station. On
this basis, a detailed life cycle cost model for large-scale battery
energy storage power station is proposed.
3.1. Framework for construction scale and material selection of
battery energy storage power station
When building a battery energy storage power station to solve
the peak shaving problem caused by the large-scale nuclear power
construction, the safe operation of nuclear power and the
comprehensive economic benefits between nuclear power and
battery energy storage power station should be fully analyzed. In
terms of the safe operation, it is considered that the frequent output
reduction of nuclear power units has a great impact on the power
grid, so the construction of battery energy storage power station
should try to keep the output of nuclear power units at an appro-
priate level. In terms of the comprehensive economic benefits, the
goal should be to maximize the overall benefits of the nuclear
power unit and battery energy storage power station. Considering
the above factors, the solution framework for construction scale
and battery type selection of battery energy storage power station
is shown in Fig. 3.
For the safe operation requirement part in Fig. 3, the construc-
tion scale boundary, peak shaving gap data and maintenance
schedule is obtained firstly. Maintenance schedule includes
network line maintenance and unit maintenance. Afterwards, the
load factors of nuclear power units with different construction scale
battery energy storage power station are calculated, and the con-
struction scale corresponding to the load factor value greater than
the load factor restriction is selected as the feasible construction
scale interval. In the next part, based on the battery performance
parameters, feasible construction scale interval, peak shaving gap
data, real-time electricity price data and the established life cycle
cost model of large-scale battery energy storage power station, the
economic benefit of battery energy storage power station and the
increase revenue of nuclear power unit are calculated. Then, the
economic indicators considering the comprehensive income be-
tween battery energy storage power station and nuclear power
station are calculated. Meanwhile, sensitive analysis is conducted to
explore the influence of control parameters and economic param-
eters to the economic indicators of each battery energy storage
power station. Combining with the results of comprehensive eco-
nomic analysis and sensitive analysis, the optimal economic con-
struction scale and battery type are selected.

Table 5
Technical comparison between battery energy storage and pumped storage.

Types Efficiency Response time Construction cost Life time Construction time Environment influence

Battery energy storage 70%~90% <10 ms 2000e4000¥/kW 8e20 year 0.5e1 year Good
Pumped storage 65%~75% >1min 4000e7000¥/kW >30 year 5e7 year Bad

6
X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al. Energy 239 (2022) 121897

Fig. 3. Solution framework for construction scale and battery type selection.

3.2. Economic indicators

P
T
Ccapital þCo&m þCrc þCdc
t
In order to conduct a comprehensive economic analysis and ð1þiÞ
t¼1
LCOE ¼ (2)
comparison, three economic indicators are used to make the in- P
T
Et
vestment decisions, namely internal rate of return (IRR) [35], ð1þiÞ
t
t¼1
payback period (PBP) [36] and levelized cost of energy (LCOE) [37].
In this study, IRR and PBP are calculated by comprehensive income, where p represents the proportion of initial investment which is set
and LCOE is calculated by the income of battery energy storage as 0.3, Cloan is the annual repayment of principal and interest
power station. Each indicator provides a unique information about considering the loan ratio of 70%, Ctax stands for various taxes
the cash flow. IRR is defined as the discount rate at which the net considering the input tax, output tax and income tax which are 13%,
present value (NPV) of all cash flows of an investment is equal to 13% and 25%, respectively, r is discount rate, T is the life cycle of
zero, and calculated from the expression of the NPV as the value of battery energy storage power station, and i is the interest rate
the parameter r that reduces the NPV to zero [38]. PBP represents which is set as 0.08, and other parameters are described in detail in
the number of years required to recover the total investment of the the subsequent life cycle cost model.
project, and it is calculated from the NPV as the time t when the In addition to the economic benefits of the energy storage po-
cumulative cash flows turn to positive. The LCOE represents the net wer station, the operation status of the nuclear power station
present value of the power station over its lifetime, and it is related should also be considered. The load factor F is usually used to
to the total investment and total capacity of the power plant in its analyze the safety and stability of nuclear power station operation
life cycle. The NPV and LCOE are calculated as equations (1) and (2), [39]. The average annual load factor F is determined by the annual
respectively. utilization hours of the nuclear power station, and calculated by:

H0
F¼ (3)
8760
NPV ¼  p , Ccapital
  where H0 is the annual utilization hours of nuclear power station.
XT Et , ps  pp  Closs  Cloan  Co&m  Crc  Ctax  Cdc
þ
t¼1 ð1 þ rÞt 3.3. Life cycle cost model of large-scale energy storage power
station
(1)
The key parameters of energy storage economics are used to
7
X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al.
establish a life cycle cost model of large-scale battery energy stor-
age power station. These parameters are initial capital cost, oper-
ation and maintenance cost, cost of loss, replacement cost and
decommissioning cost. Initial capital cost includes all investment
costs covered before the commercial operation date. Operation and
maintenance cost refers to all expenditures necessary for the
operation of power station and improvement of energy storage
efficiency during the commercial operation period. Cost of loss
refers to the energy loss caused by charging and discharging of
battery energy storage power station. Replacement cost refers to
the cost of equipment replacement within the life cycle of the en-
ergy storage power station. Decommissioning costs include resid-
ual value and site clearance costs.
3.3.1. Initial capital cost
Divided into four main parts, of which the first part is the cost of
battery energy storage system Cbp , the second part is the cost of
electrical equipment Cee , the third part is the construction and
installation engineering cost Cci and the fourth part is the pre-
liminary engineering preparation cost Cpc , the initial capital cost of
battery energy storage power station Ccapital can be calculated by:
Ccapital ¼ cbp þ cee þ cci þ cpc (4)
The cost of battery storage system Cbp includes the cost of bat-
tery pack, BMS and container, which can be expressed as a function
of the design capacity of energy storage power station. The cost of
Cbp is given by:
Cbp ¼ ðcb þ cbms þ cc Þ,Prated ,hd (5)
where Prated is the rated power of battery energy storage power
station, hd is the charging or discharging time of the energy storage
battery which is set as 2 h, cb , cbms and cc are the unit capacity cost
of the battery, BMS and container, respectively.
The cost of electric equipment Cee includes the cost of PCS,
transformer, cable and protection devices, which can be calculated
by:
 
Cee ¼ cpcd þ cptd þ cpe ,Prated (6)
where cpcd , cptd , and cpe are the unit power cost of the power
conversion device, power transformation and distribution device
and protective equipment.
The cost of construction and installation engineering cost Cci
includes the cost of construction, installation and auxiliary engi-
neering cost, which can be calculated by:
Cci ¼ cci ,Prated ,hd (7)
where cci is the unit capacity cost of the construction, installation
and auxiliary.
Different from other costs, the preliminary engineering prepa-
ration cost of energy storage power station, such as research and
consultation cost and production preparation cost, has a nonlinear
relationship with the construction scale, which is caused by market
competition. So, the preliminary engineering preparation cost Cpc
can be expressed as:
 
Prated 0:8
Cpc ¼ cpc , ,10000 (8)
10000
where cpc is the unit cost of the preliminary engineering
preparation.
8
Energy 239 (2022) 121897
3.3.2. Operation and maintenance cost
Operation and maintenance cost Co&m is divided into fixed cost
and variable cost. Fixed cost includes land leasing, tool replacement
and equipment maintenance, and it does not depend on the
operation phase of the power station. Variable cost includes oper-
ation and maintenance management, power grid operation and
maintenance, equipment insurance, depending on the operation
phase of the power station. The operation and maintenance cost
Co&m can be calculated by:
X
T X
T X
T
Co&m ¼ T,Cfixed þ Cv ,ð1 þ iÞt þ Cie ,ð1  i1 Þt þ k,Et
t¼1 t¼1 t¼1
(9)
where T is the lifetime of power station, Cfixed is the fixed operation
and maintenance cost per year, Cv is the variable operation and
maintenance cost per year, Cie is the insurance expenses, i1 is the
insurance rate which is set as 0.04, Et is the annual power gener-
ation, and k is scale factor which is set as 0.02.
3.3.3. Cost of loss
Line loss, auxiliary power, energy conversion efficiency of en-
ergy storage battery and other factors will lead to a certain amount
of power loss in the charging and discharging process of energy
storage station. Generally, PCS efficiency is 98%, AC/DC cable loop
loss efficiency is 99%, and auxiliary power loss is 1%. Then, the
charge energy efficiency h1 and discharge energy efficiency h2 of
the whole circuit of the energy storage power station can be
calculated as:

h1 ¼ hb  98%  ð1  1%Þ  ð1  1%Þ
(10)
h2 ¼ 98%  ð1  1%Þ  ð1  1%Þ ¼ 96:05%
where hb is the energy conversion efficiency of battery.
The cost of loss can be calculated by the charge discharge energy
efficiency h, real-time price and the annual power generation
considering decay rate:
 
X
T
1  h1
Closs ¼ Et , , pp þ ð1  h2 Þ , ps (11)
t¼1
h1
where Et is the annual power generation considering decay rate, pp
and ps are the electricity prices for purchase and sale, respectively.
3.3.4. Replacement cost
The design life of battery energy storage power station is
inconsistent with the life of battery, so it may face the problem of
battery and equipment replacement during the operation of battery
energy storage power station [40]. The battery replacement time is
related to the maximum number of cycles, and the market price
change of energy storage battery needs to be considered when
replacing the battery. The replacement cost Crc can be calculated as:
Crc ¼ ðcb þ cbms Þ,ð1  rb Þtr ,Prated ,hd (12)
where rb is the cost reduction rate of energy storage battery cell,
and the cost of different types of energy storage batteries has
different downward trend; tr is the replacement time, which is
obtained by dividing the maximum cycle time of the energy storage
battery by the average number of cycles per year.
3.3.5. Decommissioning cost
After the battery energy storage power station reaches its
operational life, it needs to be decommissioned, including site
X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al. Energy 239 (2022) 121897

cleaning, equipment treatment and energy storage battery recov- Table 6

ery [41]. Decommissioning cost and be divided into a percentage of Parameters of four types of energy storage batteries.

the initial capital cost and a residual value of the energy storage Battery type Efficiency Discharge depth Maximum life cycles
power station. The decommissioning cost can be calculated by: Lithium iron phosphate 92.5% 90% 6000
  Lead-carbon 87.5% 80% 4000
Cdc ¼ rp , Cbp þ Cee þ Cci  ðCbsv þ Cesv Þ,rd (13) All vanadium redox flow 87.5% 100% 12,000
Super capacitor 96% 96% 500,000

where rp is decommissioning coefficient and set to 0.1, rd is dis-

count rate which is set to 0.6 in this study, Cesv is surplus value of
equipment after depreciation and Cbsv is surplus value of energy
storage battery after depreciation.
4. Results and discussions
Based on the cost model, the proposed solution framework is
applied to the nuclear power station in Hainan Province to evaluate
the economic benefits of different battery energy storage power
stations. Considering safe operational constraints and compre-
hensive economic benefits, the economic comparison of battery
type and construction scale of various energy storage power station
is analyzed. Meanwhile, the economic comparison between battery
energy storage and pumped energy storage is conducted to verify
the superiority of battery energy storage. Subsequently, the sensi-
tive analysis is carried out to verify the influence of various pa-
rameters on the economic indicators.
4.1. Parameter setting
In order to further compare the economy of battery energy
storage power station, the specific energy storage materials and
their parameters need to be determined. In this study, lithium iron
phosphate battery, lead-carbon battery, all vanadium redox flow
battery (VRB) and super capacitor are adopted for analysis. Ac-
cording to the “made in China 2025 - energy equipment imple-
mentation plan” [42] and the research results of BNEF [43], it is
estimated that the energy cost of energy storage battery module
will drop significantly by 2025, and the downward trend of battery
energy storage module price is shown in Fig. 4. It can be seen that
the price of super capacitor and VRB module still has a lot of room
to drop. While the price of lead-carbon battery has little room for
decline, mainly because the technology of lead carbon battery is
relatively mature. According to the above research report and
prediction conclusions of related industries, it is considered that by
2025, various energy storage batteries will have their own devel-
opment in terms of the efficiency, discharge depth and maximum
cycle times. Based on the effective range of various energy storage
battery parameters given in [20,44], combined with the develop-
ment trend of various energy storage batteries, the parameters of
four types of energy storage batteries are determined and shown in
Table 6. Considering the influence of market fluctuation on per-
formance parameters, the subsequent sensitivity analysis focuses
on the possible fluctuation range of these performance parameters,
and fully discusses its economic feasibility.
In order to verify the effectiveness of the proposed solution
framework, some input parameters and experimental setup should
be declared. All the simulation works are completed in MATLAB
2018b. In terms of the load factor restriction, considering that not
all units will be put into operation in 2026, the maximum annual
utilization hour in 2026 is set as 7320 h. To maintain the safe
operation requirement, the comprehensive load factor of NO.3 and
NO.4 units should not be less than 0.8. For maintenance schedule,
network line maintenance capacity is set as 120 MW. Due to the
short operation time of the new unit, only NO.3 unit will be
considered for maintenance in the Spring Festival period of 2027.
Meanwhile, considering the demand of electricity market and to
meet the peak shaving needs, the construction scale of battery
energy storage power station is set at a range of 100e600 MW and
take 10 MW as the variable step in the simulation.
4.2. Economic analysis results under different construction scale
and batteries
Based on the established life cycle cost model and the parameter

16000

14000 Lithium iron

phosphate
12000
/kWh]

10000 Lead-carbon
Energy cost [

8000
All vanadium
6000 redox flow

4000
Super capacitor
2000

0
2010 2015 2020 2025
Time [year]

Fig. 4. Downward trend of the price of four types energy storage battery modules.

9
X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al. Energy 239 (2022) 121897

Fig. 5. Load factor of nuclear power station.

Fig. 7. PBP of different types and construction scales of energy storage power stations.

carbon, VRB and super capacitor varies from 27.21% to 7.75%,

25.84%e5.97%, 8.99%e2.73% and 7.43%e2.92%, respectively. For the
four kinds of energy storage batteries, the IRR values of lithium iron
phosphate and lead-carbon are larger than that of VRB and super
capacitor, and the IRR value of lithium iron phosphate is the largest.
At the same time, due to the lower initial capital costs, the
decreasing trend of IRR value of lithium iron phosphate and lead-
carbon is faster than that of VRB and super capacitor.
Fig. 7 illustrate the PBP value of different types and different
construction scale energy storage power station. It can be seen that
the PBP value increases with the increase of construction scale.
When construction scale increases from 100 MW to 600 MW, the
PBP of lithium iron phosphate, lead-carbon, VRB and super capac-
itor increases from 5.144 to 7.937, 1.189 to 13.134, 9.616 to 12.630
and 10.569 to 13.197, respectively. It is worth noting that the PBP of
the lead carbon battery energy storage power station has greatly
changed when the construction scale is 120 MW and 490 MW, due
to the failure to realize profit before the battery replacement.
Relatively, lithium iron phosphate has lower and stable PBP value.
Fig. 6. IRR of different types and construction scales of energy storage power stations.

of four types of energy storage batteries, the economic benefits of

different types and construction scales of energy storage power
stations and nuclear power stations in joint operation are analyzed.
The load factor of nuclear power station under different con-
struction scale energy storage power station is show in Fig. 5. When
the construction scale varies from 100 MW to 600 MW, the
comprehensive load factor of NO.3 and NO.4 units in 2026 and 2027
varies from 0.7658 to 0.8260 and 0.9202 to 0.9344. It can be seen
that when the construction scale larger than 360 MW, the increase
speed of load factor has a significant decline. In order to ensure the
safe operation of the nuclear power plant, the comprehensive load
factor of NO.3 and NO.4 units is required to be no less than 0.8.
According to the load factor curve in Fig. 5, the construction scale of
energy storage power station should be greater than 270 MW.
The economic indicator IRR of different types and different
construction scale energy storage power station are show in Fig. 6.
It can be seen that with the increase of the construction scale of the
four types energy storage power station, its IRR value is gradually
decreasing, and there is a significant change in IRR near the
maximum peak shaving gap. When the construction scale varies Fig. 8. LCOE of different types and construction scales of energy storage power
from 100 MW to 600 MW, the IRR of lithium iron phosphate, lead- stations.

10
X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al.
To better illustrate the construction feasibility of battery energy
storage power station, economic indicator LCOE is used to assess
the investment and income of the battery energy storage power
station. As show in Fig. 8, the LCOE values of different types energy
storage power stations decrease with the increase of construction
scale, which is due to the initial capital cost and operation and
maintenance cost do not change linearly with the construction
scale. With the increase of construction scale from 100 MW to
600 MW, the LCOE of lithium iron phosphate, lead-carbon, VRB and
super capacitor decreases from 0.4683 to 0.4612, 0.4642 to 0.4586,
0.5352 to 0.5293 and 0.6056 to 0.5997, respectively. The results
illustrated that lithium iron phosphate and lead-carbon has better
potential economic benefits.
Combining with Figs. 5e8, it can be seen that the economic
feasibility of energy storage power station is decreases with the
increase of construction scale. Meanwhile, considering the load
factor constraints, the construction scale should be larger than
270 MW. Therefore, the optimal construction scale is determined as
270 MW. Some economic index results of four energy storage
materials in the construction scale of 270 MW are calculated and
shown in Table 7. It can be seen that when the construction scale is
270 MW, IRR and Profit of Lithium iron phosphate are 16.27%, and
542.13 million yuan respectively, which are the largest. PBP of
Lithium iron phosphate is 6.27 year, which is the shortest. On the
other side, the LCOE of Lithium iron phosphate is 0.464 ¥/kWh,
smaller than that of VRB and super capacitor. It is indicated that
lithium iron phosphate has lower investment cost, fastest capital
recovery, and highest investment income. Compared with other
three types of energy storage materials, Lithium iron phosphate has
better economic feasibility.
4.3. Economic comparison between battery energy storage and
pumped storage
Pumped storage is commonly used to solve the stability prob-
lems caused by nuclear power construction. To further verify the
economic superiority of battery energy storage, a simply compari-
son between lithium iron phosphate battery and Hainan Qiongz-
hong pumped storage is conduced. Hainan Qiongzhong pumped
storage power station is built with No.1 and No.2 units of Chang-
jiang nuclear power station. According to the data provided in the
evaluation report of Hainan Qiongzhong pumped storage power
station, the capacity, comprehensive efficiency, total investment
and service life of Qiongzhong pumped storage power station is
600 MW, 75%, 3995.28 million yuan and 35 years, respectively.
Considering market change, the total investment of pumped stor-
age power station in 2025 is 5% lower than that in 2012, which is set
as 3795.52 million yuan. Since the evaluation report is put forward
in the early stage of the project construction, the calculation of
power generation should be based on the actual operation data.
Considering seasonal effects, according to the power generation
data of Qiongzhong pumped storage power station from 2018 to
2020 provided by Electric Power Design Institute, the annual
Table 7
Economic indexes of 270 MW various energy storage power stations.
Type Lithium iron phosphate
Capacity [MW] 270
IRR [%] 16.27
PBP [year] 6.27
LCOE [¥/kWh] 0.464
Profit [million yuan] 542.13
F2026 0.801
F2027 0.926
11
Energy 239 (2022) 121897
average load rate of Qiongzhong pumped storage power station is
estimated to be 0.542. Similarly, the 80% loan mode is adopted for
pumped storage power stations, and all kinds of taxes are consis-
tent with those for battery storage power stations. Under the same
energy storage capacity and joint operation mode, the technical
and economic indicators of the lithium iron phosphate battery
energy storage power station and Hainan Qiongzhong pumped
storage power station are shown in Table 8.
Comparison results in Table 8 show that, under the same con-
struction scale of 600 MW, the lithium iron phosphate battery
energy storage power station has larger IRR, shorter PBP, lower
LCOE, lower construction cost and smaller floor space which are
7.75%, 7.937 year, 0461¥/kWh, 3502 million yuan, and 0.4 million
square meters, respectively. Meanwhile, the battery energy storage
power station has less impact on the environment and is more
flexible. The LCOE of Qiongzhong pumped storage power station is
calculated based on the actual operation data, and is larger than the
general feasibility planning results, which is related to the influence
of seasonal factors and full pumping time. It is indicated that in-
vestment in the construction of lithium iron phosphate battery
energy storage power station can not only solve the problem of
short-term peak load regulation, but also obtain better compre-
hensive economic benefits.
4.4. Sensitive analysis
In this study, control parameters of energy storage battery and
economic parameters are key parameters, of which the variation
has a great impact on the economic feasibility of energy storage
power station construction. In terms of the control parameters, the
maximum number of cycles, discharge depth and efficiency are
selected for analysis, which are the main indicators to evaluate
battery performance. In terms of the economic parameters, the cost
of battery module and peak electricity price are selected for anal-
ysis, which are the main indicators to reflect the development of
energy storage market. Meanwhile, a single-variable analysis
method is used to test the sensitivity of three economic indicators
(IRR, PBP and LCOE) of different types of battery energy storage
power station to these variables. Considering the feasibility of
fluctuation range, the battery efficiency and discharge depth fluc-
tuate within ±6%, and the maximum number of cycles, battery
module price and peak electricity price fluctuate within ±15%. The
economic indicator IRR, PBP and LCOE are taken as the reference
values when construction scale is 270 MW. The reference values of
control parameters are set as Table 6, the reference values of eco-
nomic parameters are set as Table 3 and Fig. 4.
As a presentative, sensitive analysis result of IRR of battery en-
ergy storage power station to these five parameters are shown in
Fig. 9. As shown in Fig. 9(a), when battery efficiency and discharge
depth vary from 0.94 times to 1.06 times of reference value, the IRR
varies from 0.1255 to 0.2028 and 0.1239 to 0.1972, respectively.
When maximum number cycles, battery module price and peak
electrical price vary from 0.85 times to 1.15 times of reference value,
Lead-carbon VRB Super capacitor
270 270 270
13.88 6.01 4.50
8.84 10.86 12.19
0.461 0.532 0.603
460.17 368.17 376.39
0.801 0.801 0.801
0.926 0.926 0.926
X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al. Energy 239 (2022) 121897

Table 8
Economic comparison between the lithium iron phosphate battery energy storage and Qiongzhong pumped storage power stations.

Type lithium iron phosphate battery Qiongzhong pumped storage

Capacity [MW] 600 600

Service life [year] 15 35
IRR [%] 7.75 3.0
PBP [year] 7.937 28.43
LCOE [¥/kWh] 0.461 0.660
Construction cost [¥/kW] 3502 6326
Initial capital cost [million yuan] 2101.2 3995.27
Total profit [million yuan] 822.04 1002.45
Floor space [million square meters] 0.4 2.8

Fig. 9. Sensitive analysis result of IRR to control and economic parameters: (a) lithium iron phosphate; (b) lead-carbon; (c) VRB; (d) super capacitor.

the IRR varies from 0.1431 to 0.1785, 0.2548 to 0.1016 and 0.0193 to
0.2849, respectively. As show in Fig. 9(b)e(d), it can be seen that for
different energy storage materials, the sensitivity of IRR to pa-
rameters has the same trend, but the influence degree of each
parameter on IRR is different under different materials. It is illus-
trated that those economic parameters have more influence to IRR
than control parameters, and IRR is most sensitive to the peak
electricity price. Due to the battery replacement time of the energy
storage station set to an integer year, the change trend of IRR is not
smooth when the maximum number of cycles changes.
Fig. 10 shows the sensitive analysis results of PBP of battery
energy storage power station to these five parameters. As shown in
Fig. 10(a), when battery efficiency and discharge depth vary from
0.94 times to 1.06 times of reference value, the PBP varies from 6.81
to 5.87 and 6.77 to 5.85, respectively. When maximum number
cycles, battery module price and peak electrical price vary from
0.85 times to 1.15 times of reference value, the PBP varies from 6.24
to 6.30, 5.43 to 7.13 and 14.52 to 5.07, respectively. The main reason
for the decrease of PBP with the increase of the maximum number
of cycles is the tax increase caused by the decrease of annual
depreciation. Combine with Fig. 10(b)e(d), It can be seen that PBP is
most sensitive to peak electrical price. This is because the NPV is
still negative before battery replacement, which leads to further
delay of capital recovery.
The sensitivity of LCOE of battery energy storage power station
to these five parameters are shown in Fig. 11. As shown in Fig. 11(a),
when battery efficiency and discharge depth vary from 0.94 times
to 1.06 times of reference value, the LCOE varies from 0.465 to 0.463
and 0.486 to 0.444, respectively. When maximum number cycles
and battery module price vary from 0.85 times to 1.15 times of
reference value, the PBP varies from 0.479 to 0.453 and 0.422 to
0.506 respectively. The LCOE does not change with the variation of
peak electrical price, because the LCOE is only related to the in-
vestment and total power generation. As show in Fig. 11(b)e(d),

12
X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al.
Fig. 10. Sensitive analysis result of PBP to control and economic parameters: (a) lithium iron phosphate; (b) lead-carbon; (c) VRB; (d) super capacitor.
due to the high investment, the sensitivity of VRB and super
capacitor to control parameters is much less than that of lithium
iron phosphate battery and lead carbon battery. Among these five
parameters, LCOE is most sensitive to battery module price.
Based on the above sensitivity analysis, it can be concluded that
control parameters and economic parameters have noticeable in-
fluences on the economic indicators of battery energy storage po-
wer station. Among the four types of battery energy storage power
stations, the economic benefit of lithium iron phosphate battery
energy storage power station is relatively more stable. LCOE is most
affected by the price of battery module. In terms of the investment
income, IRR and PBP are greatly affected by efficiency, discharge
depth, battery module price and peak electricity price, among
which peak electricity price has the greatest influence. It can be
seen that all kinds of battery energy storage power stations can
achieve positive revenue within the possible fluctuation range of
maximum cycle times, efficiency, discharge depth and battery
module price. However, only lithium iron phosphate battery can
maintain positive revenue within the possible fluctuation range of
peak electricity price. On the one hand, this reflects the economic
advantages of lithium iron phosphate battery. On the other hand,
the sharp decline of peak electricity price is often caused by market
competition, which will inevitably lead to the improvement of
control parameters or the decrease of battery module price. The
performance improvement can make up for the lack of economic
benefits caused by the decline of peak electricity price to a certain
extent.
At present, the development trend of the market is that the
control parameters are gradually improved, the price of battery
13
Energy 239 (2022) 121897
module is gradually reduced, and the peak valley price difference of
power grid is gradually reduced. According to the sensitivity anal-
ysis results, it can be seen that the income increase brought by the
improvement of battery performance is limited, which is not as
large as the improvement space brought by the change of battery
module price and market electricity price. At the same time, the
impact of peak electricity price on battery energy storage revenue is
greater than the cost of battery module, indicating that the grad-
ually reduced peak valley price difference will become an impor-
tant factor affecting the economy of battery energy storage.
Therefore, the economic feasibility of the future construction of the
battery energy storage power station will not become necessarily
better, but depends on the tradeoff between the cost performance
of battery and the real-time peak valley price difference.
4.5. Discussion
In view of the peak shaving problem caused by Hainan nuclear
power construction, the solution framework of battery type and
construction scale selection is proposed for the joint operation of
battery energy storage power station and nuclear power station, in
which three economic indicators IRR, PBP and LCOE are selected for
comparison. First of all, the construction of battery energy storage
power station should ensure the safe operation of nuclear power
units, which is mainly reflected in the load factor level of nuclear
power station. The results show that in 2026, the construction scale
of energy storage power station with the load factor greater than
0.8 should be greater than 270 MW. Generally, if only the benefit of
battery energy storage power station is considered, the IRR is
X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al.
Fig. 11. Sensitive analysis result of LCOE to control and economic parameters: (a) lithium iron phosphate; (b) lead-carbon; (c) VRB; (d) super capacitor.
increased with the increase of construction scale until the con-
struction scale equal to the maximum peak shaving gap value, and
IRR is the largest when the construction scale is 360 MW. However,
by considering the comprehensive profit of battery energy storage
power station and nuclear power station, IRR is decreased with the
increase of construction scale, and PBP is increased with the in-
crease of construction scale, indicating that lower construction
scale has better comprehensive economic efficiency. Therefore, the
most economical construction scale of battery energy storage po-
wer station is 270 MW.
Economic comparison results between these four energy stor-
age batteries in the construction scale of 270 MW show that lithium
iron phosphate battery energy storage power station has the best
comprehensive performance in economic feasibility. Benefit from
lower battery module price and higher efficiency, lithium iron
phosphate battery energy storage power station has the largest IRR,
shortest PBP and maximum total profit which are 16.27%, 6.27 year
and 542.13 million yuan. Benefit by lower battery module price, the
lead-carbon battery energy storage power station has the lowest
LCOE which is 0.461¥/kWh. However, economic benefit of lead-
carbon battery is not as good as that of lithium iron phosphate
battery due to its small maximum number of cycles and low battery
efficiency. Due to the higher battery module price, the compre-
hensive economic benefit of VRB and super capacitor energy stor-
age power station is worse than lithium iron phosphate battery and
lead-carbon battery obviously. Meanwhile, the comparison be-
tween lithium iron phosphate battery energy storage power station
and pumped storage power station further illustrates the economic
advantages of lithium iron phosphate battery energy storage power
14
Energy 239 (2022) 121897
station in terms of the low initial investment, fast capital recovery
and high final income. Due to the low comprehensive efficiency,
high initial investment and seasonal influence on power genera-
tion, the economic benefit of the pumped storage power station is
not ideal.
In order to further analyze the feasibility of construction and the
impact of using different energy storage materials on economic
benefits, single-variable sensitive analysis method is used to
analyze the impact of control parameters and economic parameters
on various economic indicators of battery energy storage power
station. For different battery types, the sensitivity of economic in-
dicators to parameters has the same trend, but the influence degree
of each parameter on economic indicator is different. Sensitive
analysis results show that the peak electricity price has the most
influence to IRR and PBP for each battery energy storage power
station, because the peak electricity price directly determines the
income of battery energy storage power station. The maximum
number of cycles has the least influence to IRR and PBP for each
battery energy storage power station, because the maximum
number of cycles does not affect the sales revenue. In terms of the
LCOE, the impact of battery module price is much greater than
other parameters, because the cost of battery module accounts for a
large proportion of the total initial investment. On the one hand,
the fluctuation of various economic indicators of lithium iron
phosphate battery energy storage power station is the smallest and
can achieve positive benefits, indicating that its investment income
is more stable. On the other hand, battery energy storage presents
the trend of performance improvement and price reduction.
Considering the limited space for performance improvement of
X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al.
battery energy storage and the gradually decreasing peak valley
price difference, the future economic benefit of battery energy
storage power station largely depends on the trade-off between the
cost performance of battery and the peak valley price difference.
In view of the peak shaving problems caused by nuclear power
construction, this study proposes a solution framework of battery
energy storage and nuclear power combined peak shaving, which is
also applicable to the grid stability problems caused by the con-
struction of other large-scale power stations. For nuclear power, the
load factor is a common indicator used to evaluate the output and
stable operation of nuclear power. For other types of power sta-
tions, the load factor can also represent the operator's expectation
for the annual output value of the power station. In terms of the
comprehensive economic analysis, the increased revenue of nu-
clear power under the joint operation mode is only related to the
auxiliary service demand size, auxiliary service demand duration,
energy storage capacity and on-grid price. The auxiliary service
demand and on-grid price are determined based on the grid
planning, and the energy storage capacity selection will directly
affect the economic benefits of the energy storage station and nu-
clear power. The significance of sensitivity analysis is to consider
the uncertainty of input parameters and further evaluate the eco-
nomic feasibility of different types of energy storage batteries.
Therefore, the proposed solution framework can be applied not
only to nuclear power plants, but also to other large-scale power
plants. On the premise of clear demand for ancillary services, the
solution framework can be applied to other stability problems
caused by various types of power station construction.
This study mainly focuses on the joint operation mode between
two power stations, and the proposed solution framework is
feasible to the large-scale power station with large single unit and
higher safe operation requirement. However, the stability problem
in this study is caused by the construction of the power station
itself. For the stability problem caused by the power grid operation,
the joint operation mode is not necessarily applicable. In terms of
the economic feasibility, the reduction of electricity price difference
between peak and valley will have a certain impact on the eco-
nomic benefits of battery energy storage. Meanwhile, the feasibility
of the actual project construction will be affected by whether the
battery energy storage power station adopts distributed grid
connection or centralized grid connection, as well as the location of
the power station and whether it serves for renewable energy
[45,46].
5. Conclusion and future work
Based on the Hainan case, this study analyses the economic
feasibility about the battery energy storage power station cooper-
ating with nuclear power for peak shaving, and proposes a novel
feasible solution framework for the battery type selection and
construction scale determination, which is also effective to other
stability problems. Comprehensive economic comparison results
show that the joint operation mode can effectively enhance the
safety and flexibility of nuclear power. When considering the
constraints of comprehensive economic benefits and safe opera-
tion, 270 MW lithium iron phosphate battery energy storage power
station has the best economic performance in terms of the IRR, PBP,
LCOE and total benefit. The sensitivity analysis results show that
considering the uncertainty of parameters, the benefit of lithium
iron phosphate battery energy storage power station is more stable,
and the impact of cost parameters on economic indicators is more
obvious, indicating that the contradiction between energy storage
price and power market is increasingly prominent. In the future
work, the proposed solution framework will be extended to solve
the problem of frequency regulation and reactive power regulation
15
Energy 239 (2022) 121897
faced by the power grid. Meanwhile, other uncertainties, such as
residuals rate and financing ratio will be considered.
Credit author statement
Xiaojiao Chen: Resources, Writing e review & editing, Super-
vision, Data curation. Liansheng Huang: Conceptualization,
Methodology, Software, Investigation, Writing e original draft.
Junbo Liu: Resources, Writing e review & editing, Supervision,
Data curation. Dongran Song: Resources, Conceptualization,
Methodology, Software, Supervision, Writing e original draft.
Sheng Yang: Writing e review & editing.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
This work is supported by the Plan for Major Provincial Science
& Technology Project of Anhui Province under Grant
202003a05020019, the Comprehensive Research Facility for Fusion
Technology under Grant 2018-000052-73-01-001228 and the
Innovation-Driven Project of Central South University (No.
2020CX031).
References
[1] IRENA. Global renewables Outlook: energy transformation 2050. 2020.
[2] Ye Q. China's nuclear power development after fukushima nuclear power
plant accident. Zhongguo Dianji Gongcheng Xuebao/Proceedings of the Chi-
nese Society of Electrical Engineering 2012;32(11):1e8.
[3] China Nuclear Energy Association. China nuclear energy development report
(2020). Beijing: Social Science Literature Publishing House; 2020.
[4] Wang, Zhao XL, et al. Safety constraints and optimal operation of large-scale
nuclear power plant participating in peak load regulation of power system.
IET Gener, Transm Distrib 2017;11(13):3332e40. 2017.
[5] Wei Z, Hu S, Hui S, et al. Joint generation dispatching of power system with
nuclear power units participating in peak load regulation[C]//International
Conference on Smart Grid & Clean Energy Technologies. IEEE; 2017.
[6] Azas A, Ks A, Ah B. Review of energy storage services, applications, limitations,
and benefits. Energy Rep 2020;6:288e306.
[7] Jingyan, Li Chuanbao, et al. Prospect of new pumped-storage power station.
Global Energy Interconnection 2019;2(3):43e51.
[8] Gong Ying, Tan Changshu, Zhang Yannan, Yuan Yiping, Zhou Lei, Li Yan,
Wang Jianxue. Peak shaving benefits assessment of renewable energy source
considering joint operation of nuclear and pumped storage station. Energy
Procedia 2018:152.
[9] Kong Y, Kong Z, Liu Z, et al. Pumped storage power stations in China: the past,
the present, and the future. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;71:720e31.
[10] Cho J, Jeong S, Kim Y. Commercial and research battery technologies for
electrical energy storage applications. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2015;48(jun):
84e101.
[11] Tong Xin, Jianbo Hao, Zhang Kun. Application of lithium battery energy
storage in the wind power system. Elec Power Sci Eng 2013;29(2):5e10.
[12] Shi Y, Xu B, Wang D, Zhang B. Using battery storage for peak shaving and
frequency regulation: joint optimization for superlinear gains. IEEE Trans
Power Syst 2018;33(3):2882e94.
[13] Zhai Q, Meng K, Dong ZY, Ma J. Modeling and analysis of lithium battery
operations in spot and frequency regulation service markets in Australia
electricity market. IEEE Trans Ind Informatics 2017;13(5):2576e86.
[14] Kebede AA, Coosemans T, Messagie M, et al. Techno-economic analysis of
lithium-ion and lead-acid batteries in stationary energy storage application.
J. Energy Storage 2021;40:102748.
[15] Davies D M, Verde M G, Mnyshenko O, et al. Combined economic and tech-
nological evaluation of battery energy storage for grid applications[J]. Nature
Energy.
[16] Abbott M, Cohen B. Issues associated with the possible contribution of battery
energy storage in ensuring a stable electricity system. Electr J 2020;33(6):
106771.
[17] Hemmati R. Optimal design and operation of energy storage systems and
generators in the network installed with wind turbines considering practical
characteristics of storage units as design variable. J Clean Prod
X. Chen, L. Huang, J. Liu et al.
2018;185(JUN.1):680e93.
[18] Martinez-Bolanos JR, Udaeta M, Gimenes A, et al. Economic feasibility of
battery energy storage systems for replacing peak power plants for com-
mercial consumers under energy time of use tariffs. The J. Energy Storage
2020;29:101373.
[19] Mostafa MH, Aleem S, Ali SG, et al. Techno-economic assessment of energy
storage systems using annualized life cycle cost of storage (LCCOS) and lev-
elized cost of energy (LCOE) metrics. The J. Energy Storage 2020;29:101345.
[20] Bsa B, Xsa B, Dan WC, et al. Economic analysis of lithium-ion batteries recycled
from electric vehicles for secondary use in power load peak shaving in China.
J Clean Prod 2020:276.
[21] Tao ZA, Rgaw A, Rla B, et al. Optimal sizing and sensitivity analysis of a
battery-supercapacitor energy storage system for electric vehicles. Energy
2021.
[22] Jiang Xin, Jin Yang, Zheng Xueyuan, Hu Guobao, Zeng Qingshan. Optimal
configuration of grid-side battery energy storage system under power mar-
ketization. Appl Energy 2020:272.
[23] Lange C, Rueß A, Nuß A, et al. Dimensioning battery energy storage systems
for peak shaving based on a real-time control algorithm. Appl Energy
2020;280:115993.
[24] Mulleriyawage UGK, Shen WX. Impact of demand side management on
optimal sizing of residential battery energy storage system. Renew Energy
2021;172:1250e66.
[25] Feng ZK, Niu, et al. Peak shaving operation of hydro-thermal-nuclear plants
serving multiple power grids by linear programming. Energy 2017;135:
210e9. 2017.
[26] Siqueira L, Peng W. Control strategy to smooth wind power output using
battery energy storage system: a review. The J. Energy Storage 2021;35(45):
102252.
[27] Dqa B, Gw B, Tg B, et al. Potential impact of the end-of-life batteries recycling
of electric vehicles on lithium demand in China: 2010e2050. Sci Total Environ
2020.
[28] Sakar S, Balci ME, Aleem SHEA, Zobaa AF. Hosting capacity assessment and
improvement for photovoltaic-based distributed generation in distorted dis-
tribution networks. In: 2016 IEEE 16th Int. Conf. Environ. Electr. Eng. IEEE;
2016. p. 1e6.
[29] Zobaa AF, Ribeiro PF, Aleem S, et al. Energy storage at different Voltage levels:
technology, integration, and market aspects[M]. 2018.
[30] Kumar SM, Arun S, Mayavan S. Effect of carbon nanotubes with varying di-
mensions and properties on the performance of lead acid batteries operating
under high rate partial state of charge conditions[J]. The J. Energy Storage
2019;24(AUG):100806.
[31] Lourenssen K, Williams J, Ahmadpour F, et al. Vanadium redox flow batteries:
a comprehensive review. J. Energy Storage 2019;25(Oct):
16
Energy 239 (2022) 121897
100844.1e100844.17.
[32] Ribeiro PF, Johnson BK, Crow ML, Arsoy A, Liu Y. Energy storage systems for
advanced power applications. Proc IEEE 2001;89:1744e56.
[33] Mahlia T, Saktisahdan T, Jannifar A, Hasan M, Matseelar H. A review of
available methods and development on energy storage; technology update.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;33:532e45.
[34] ud din Mufti M, Lone SA, Iqbal SJ, Ahmad M, Ismail M. Super-capacitor based
energy storage system for improved load frequency control. Elec Power Syst
Res 2009;79:226e33.
[35] Mellichamp DA. Internal rate of return: good and bad features, and a new way
of interpreting the historic measure. Comput Chem Eng 2017;106(nov.2):
396e406.
[36] Villena-Ruiz R, Javier Ramirez F, Honrubia-Escribano A, et al. A techno-eco-
nomic analysis of a real wind farm repowering experience: the Malpica case.
Energy Convers Manag 2018;172(SEP):182e99.
[37] Abdelhady S. Performance and cost evaluation of solar dish power plant:
sensitivity analysis of levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) and net present value
(NPV). Renew Energy 2020;168(12).
[38] Colmenar-Santos A, Campos Pe rez-Romero S, Pe rez-Molina C, Mur-Perez F.
Repowering: an actual possibility for wind energy in Spain in a new scenario
without feed-in-tariffs. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;41:319e37.
[39] Feixiang, Peng, Wei, et al. Equivalent peak load regulation of nuclear power
plant considering benefits of different power generation groups - Science-
Direct[J]. Energy Procedia, 152:227-232.
[40] Karamov DN. Methodology for calculating the lifetime of storage batteries in
autonomous energy systems with renewable power generation - Science-
Direct. Energy Rep 2020;6:15e24.
[41] Nian V, Jindal G, Li H. A feasibility study on integrating large-scale battery
energy storage systems with combined cycle power generation - setting the
bottom line. Energy 2019;185(Oct.15):396e408.
[42] Li Ling. China's manufacturing locus in 2025: with a comparison of "Made-in-
China 2025" and "Industry 4.0". Technol Forecast Soc Change 2018:66e74.
[43] BNEF. 2019 long-term energy storage Outlook [R]. 2019.
[44] Yang B, Wang J, Chen Y, et al. Optimal sizing and placement of energy storage
system in power grids: a state-of-the-art one-stop handbook. The J. Energy
Storage 2020;32(4):101814.
[45] Song Dongran, Qing Chang, Songyue Zheng, Sheng Yang, Jian Yang, and Young
Hoon Joo. Adaptive model predictive control for Yaw system of variable-speed
wind turbines. J Mod Power Syst Clean Energy 2021;9(1):219e24. https://
doi.org/10.35833/MPCE.2019.000467.
[46] Yang Jian, et al. Review of control strategy of large horizontal-axis wind
turbines Yaw system. Wind Energy 2021;24(2):97e115. https://doi.org/
10.1002/we.2564.