CCTV "Dialogue"丨Liquid flow, lithium battery, sodium battery, which one is the future of energy storage? Is energy storage oversupplied? (Attached with full text)

Host: President Du, is a little bit more energy storage time really that important?

Du Zhongming: I look at this issue from the perspective of the security of our country's energy supply. So the security of our country's energy supply is in urgent need of improvement. For long-term energy storage, we think it is mainly: the time is long, we must ensure that we have enough time to make room for the initial digestion of our new energy. The second is that long-term energy storage is to ensure that we can efficiently convert and utilize it. In fact, what we just discussed are the problems of this mainstream technology itself, but we are concerned about the efficiency of energy storage.

So you ask whether long-term energy storage will become mainstream? I think it is at least the most important component of our entire system in the future.

Through the guests' narration, we know that each energy storage technology has its own advantages and disadvantages. Theoretically, the total cost of sodium batteries is 30% to 40% lower than that of lithium batteries. At the beginning of the year, the price of battery-grade lithium carbonate was as high as 600,000 yuan per ton, and it dropped to only 160,000 yuan in April. Although it has now fallen back to 300,000 yuan, some people think that sodium batteries have lost their opportunities due to the sharp price cut. Is this really the case?

Host: The price of lithium has dropped by half, but does (sodium ion) still have its advantage?

Huang Xuejie: ​​Sodium ions have something in common with lithium ions. They can meet the needs of short-term energy storage. The so-called short-term energy storage is within four hours. Another great development of sodium ion battery energy storage is helpful to the development of lithium ion battery energy storage. It can help to suppress the price of lithium carbonate to a level that cannot rise. Because I believe that after the sodium ion industry matures, the price of lithium carbonate will definitely not reach 600,000, or even 300,000. This is actually of great value to the development of the lithium battery industry.

If short-term energy storage is done well, it will also be valuable for the development of long-term energy storage. In this process, short-term and long-term energy storage can even be combined. As for lithium ions, we are also considering a combination recently. Lithium iron phosphate has poor low-temperature performance, while sodium ions have good low-temperature properties. We are also considering combining the two. So in general, the development of multiple sources promotes each other.

Wang Pengcheng: I think the price of lithium carbonate will definitely not remain at this level. From the information we have obtained, there will definitely be a steady downward fluctuation. I think there is a high probability that the price will be halved again next year. Of course, everyone has their own opinions, so we will wait and see.

Secondly, I think the advantage of sodium ions cannot be simply judged by the current price. Because in theory, the final cost of a technical route will definitely converge with its own material cost. In other words, no matter how much lithium drops in the end, the theoretical cost of sodium should still have a certain space to surpass that of lithium.

Third, I don’t think lithium and sodium are in an antagonistic relationship. Instead, they are in a typical complementary relationship, including the price comparison and adjustment of sodium, and the universality of sodium batteries in specific application scenarios. Whether it is two-wheeled vehicles or some household models, I think sodium has its place.

Chen Jun: Lithium-ion and sodium-ion batteries may last less than 4 hours, while flow batteries may last more than one to eight hours or even longer. I think this electrochemical technology is a flourishing one. Because every company has its advantages and disadvantages, it is difficult to say which type of electrochemical technology is 100% good and the others are not good. Some may last relatively short, but the emergency response needs to be fast. Some may last longer. So I think this is a flourishing electrochemical technology.

Wang Xiaoli: Actually, there is a consensus. First of all, the demand is diversified. So energy storage technology must be diversified. Liquid flow batteries target the medium and long term market. Secondly, the scale will be larger, so this is different from lithium batteries or sodium batteries in the terminal market. Especially in our country, the new energy is concentrated in the northwest, and energy consumption is all in the southeast. That is, large-scale energy storage will become an infrastructure. The technologies we have now are more parallel technologies, and more of them are technologies that meet different market needs.

Chen Jun: I think that if China's modernization development is to complement multiple energies, energy must come first. For example, solar energy and wind energy will certainly account for a larger and larger share of electricity generation. It is predicted that if carbon neutrality is achieved in 2060, the reduction of renewable energy may exceed 50%. So this is what President Du just mentioned, that is, long-term energy storage may need to be considered in China. So I think long-term energy storage, whether it is lithium-ion sodium-ion liquid flow or other energy storage methods, including physical pumped storage, will work together.

Perhaps a certain type of long-term energy storage may include several different energy storage technologies. Considering different application scenarios, there may be multi-energy complementarity.

In fact, energy storage must first pay attention to safety, but under this premise, costs must still be reduced so that the market can better accept it.

Is it profitable to do energy storage?

At present, policies generally require that new energy projects be configured in a certain proportion of installed capacity as a prerequisite for grid connection. This has boosted the energy storage market. As of the end of May 2023, 23 provinces in China have made it clear that new energy is required to be equipped with energy storage, but in fact, if it is not required to be equipped, few power generation companies are willing to actively configure energy storage, because the configuration cost is too high, which will reduce the rate of return.

Host: If we don’t allocate storage, it won’t work. But if we allocate storage, profitability may decline. How can we break this cycle?

Du Zhongming: Today we see that this problem has been reflected quite seriously. After the mandatory storage of new energy, many of our energy storage power stations are now more efficient. I wonder where the problem lies? It is that the status of our energy storage as a market-oriented subject has not been fully determined. It is laid out together with our new energy power stations. As a result, many of our energy storages are not effectively or efficiently utilized. Our market mechanism and price system are not yet sound. The next step is to exert efforts on both ends. One is to determine a certain market subject status, and I need to have a certain price mechanism for it to reflect its value in the entire new power system. The second is to allow it to fully participate in the competition in our power market. In the process of competition, we will continue to bring out new technologies, so that the iteration of this technology will be more conducive to the construction of our country's new power system.

△Du Zhongming, Party Secretary and President of China Electric Power Planning and Design Institute

Chen Jun: The president just mentioned that the policy requirement is to allocate reserves. At the same time, there is also a market call. For example, investment must be profitable. Why hasn't the market fully achieved this function? There is still a period of adjustment between the allocation of reserves and the market regulation policy and the market.

Huang Xuejie: ​​This is about the market. If we want to give energy storage a market position, it is currently following thermal power or photovoltaic power, and it does not have an independent market position. So its value is determined by others, not by the market. The money earned from its capacity value and peak-shaving capacity cannot be earned because it is not judged by the market.

So I think that we need to establish the market position of energy storage, and add good policies, and only with a combined force can this matter develop in a healthier way.

Host: Before this, our new energy development has relied on subsidies to develop to where it is today. We now have mandatory storage. If this policy is no longer in place one day, will it still be able to survive in the market?

Wang Xiaoli: Actually, we do not think that mandatory energy storage is a long-term direction for the future, because it is only a short-term policy orientation. In the past, there was no such link (energy storage) in the generation, transmission, distribution and use of our entire power system. Now that new energy has been introduced, there is an energy storage link. Energy storage ultimately brings together all the links of generation, transmission and distribution, so each link must bear the energy storage cost and transmit it to the terminal.

So the current mechanism is just a transitional mechanism. In the future, we believe that a completely market-oriented mechanism that pays for performance and can determine the value of energy storage and its corresponding benefits will be introduced. At that time, it will be a real market behavior.

Wang Pengcheng: First of all, the conclusion is of course that it is definitely possible. The current transitional mechanism is to promote the start-up of the entire industry and the transitional period of policy adjustment. Because we are now in the international cycle and the energy reform cycle, it needs to do this at this node and cannot wait. The entire policy of strong allocation will gradually decline and finally form a completely market-oriented mechanism.