US power sector battery storage momentum keeps charging on
Steady cost declines combined with rising energy density levels are driving utilities to ramp up battery installations, and battery storage output now often exceeds all other power sources for key periods in certain electricity markets.
Batteries are also stabilizing electricity networks by helping to control frequency and voltage levels, and by preventing grid overloads by storing excess solar power output and then discharging that power during peak consumption periods.
Below are key trends to help track the continuing growth of battery systems within U.S. utility networks.
Until recently, battery systems played only a tiny role within U.S. electricity networks, as utilities focused more on building out capacity from natural gas plants, solar and wind farms and other generation sources.
In 2020, there was 30 times more solar capacity and 74 times more wind farm capacity than battery capacity within the U.S. generation system, according to energy data portal Cleanview.
However, dramatic drops in the cost of battery systems - by as much as 40% a year since 2022 according to industry consultants - have helped drive uptake across several U.S. markets with large solar farm installations.
As of April 2025, there was only around 5 times more solar and wind capacity in the U.S. than battery capacity, and battery capacity keeps climbing.
Utility networks mainly use batteries to store surplus power generated from solar farms during the middle of the day - when system demand and power prices are typically at their lowest - and then discharge them when demand and prices rise.
This solar plus battery combination allows utilities to avoid the need to throttle back output from across their network during the peak solar window, and to capture higher overall power prices by preventing the mid-day price dip.
As of April 2025, there was just under 30,000 megawatts (MW) of utility battery capacity across the U.S., according to Cleanview.
That total was over 28,000 MW more than was in place in 2020, and compares to solar power's growth of 84,200 MW and wind power's growth of 37,000 MW over that same period.
Since 2022, utilities have installed more battery capacity than wind capacity, and are set to continue prioritizing the build-out of battery systems.
As of April, there are 19 states with 100 MW or more of utility-scale battery storage.
California is by far the top battery storage user, with around 13,000 MW in place, or about 42% of the national total.
The California Independent System Operator (CAISO) is also the largest battery user among major U.S. electricity networks, and uses batteries to maximise the uptake and impact of its solar systems.
The CAISO system has around 21,000 MW of solar capacity and about 12,400 MW of battery capacity, according to the California Energy Commission.
That hefty battery capacity allows CAISO to use batteries as a key source of power during peak demand periods, particularly during the early evening when solar output drops off and household electricity demand picks up.
Between 7 p.m. and 9 p.m. on June 19, batteries were CAISO's single largest source of electricity and accounted for roughly 26% of total electricity supplies during that period, according to electricity portal GridStatus.io.
Natural gas was CAISO's next largest power source - accounting for around 23% of supplies, followed by wind and hydro.
The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), the main electricity market for Texas, is a more recent adopter of battery systems, and in 2024 added more battery capacity than any other state.
As of April, Texas had around 8,200 MW of installed battery capacity, which helped supply around 7% to 8% of ERCOT's total power during the evening of June 19, GridStatus.io data shows.
Other states rapidly expanding battery footprints include Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico, which all also have growing volumes of utility-scale solar capacity which can be better harnessed when paired with battery systems.
With battery prices widely expected to undergo further cost declines as vendors compete for business and new products are commercialized, more widespread uptake of battery systems is expected.
A recent report by asset management firm Lazard pegged the so-called levelized cost of energy from utility-scale solar farms paired with batteries at between $50 and $131 per megawatt hour (MWh), depending on system scale.
That compares to $47 to $170 per MWH for new natural gas peaking plants, around $24 to $39 per MWh for combined cycle gas plants, and up to $114 per MWh for new coal-fired plants.
Given that the solar plus battery combination is often also far faster to deploy than constructing new power plants, the increasingly economical cost of batteries is expected to help them penetrate even less sunny areas going forward.
That should ensure a steady widening in the deployment of battery systems across U.S. electricity networks in the years ahead.
The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters.
Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab and X, opens new tab.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
3 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
HAMISH MCRAE: Why now could be the time to sell your shares
It's a tricky time for investors. Quite aside from all the geopolitical stuff in Alaska, the trade disruption, inflation climbing again, and all that, there are troubling signs for the world economy. Yet there is also FOMO, the fear of missing out, and anyone who has remained fully invested in global equities will so far have been well rewarded. You can see this tension in the markets. The FTSE 100 duly hit an intraday all-time high of 9,222 early on Friday morning, only to worry that this might not be such a great idea after all and slither back down. The S&P 500 closed on Thursday at a record high, but weakened on Friday too. There's that nagging doubt that we're in the final phase of what has been a great bull market and something nasty is around the corner. The professionals are picking this up. Goldman Sachs has warned of the possibility of a sharp sell-off in the S&P 500, with more than a 10 per cent chance of a decline in the next three months and more than a 20 per cent chance next year. Those percentages may not sound very high, but if there is to be one of those classic October crashes, it's good to have a warning on the record. Here in London, Longview Economics has a model that is signalling that the S&P 500 is a strong sell, noting 'signs of froth and speculation' and asking that tough question: 'Is the market about to sell off (or even crash)?' It is neutral on this, acknowledging that it might be being overcautious. But it also points out that whenever a company produces disappointing results, its shares get hammered. Taking the US market as a whole, it is one of those situations where it has to keep pedalling hard to keep the bicycle upright, with any slowdown or wobble potentially ending up in a crash. There is a long list of things that might lead to a wobble. Looking at the world economy, we don't yet have any real feeling for the damage to growth or inflation from Donald Trump's tariffs. But put it this way: tariffs cannot boost global growth or cut overall inflation. They have to be negative, and it is not as though the world economy is in great shape. Look at us here. Thanks to a not-too-dreadful second quarter after the strong start, the UK does seem to be the fastest-growing economy in the G7 so far this year, as Rachel Reeves has said. Sure, that follows a very weak second half last year, and sure, it is puffed up by an unsustainable increase in public spending. But you do have to ask that if we are the best, what on earth is happening to the others? There's the evidence of rising inflation, particularly here but also in the US, and the impact that will have on long-term interest rates. Our ten-year gilt yield touched 4.7 per cent in Friday trading. Some institutions are forced to hold Government debt, but for the rest of us, it can't be a good idea to lend to governments that have no serious intention of cutting their fiscal deficits. There are all sorts of troubling signs of a slowdown. Houses are taking longer to sell in America and demand for graduate jobs there is weak. Walk down any High Street and count the number of voids. Our hospitality sector is struggling. We know we will be clobbered with higher taxes come the autumn. The fact that things feel fragile here does not mean FTSE 100 shares will be directly hit because more than three-quarters of their profits come from abroad, either in exports or earnings from overseas. But there are parallels: a lot of people across Europe as well as in America are tightening their belts. How long before that shows up in the profit and loss accounts of multinationals? You see the point. On a very long view, it is always right to invest in global equities. If you get out, it's always difficult to know when to get back in. The UK market certainly offers good value vis-a-vis the US one but, as Bloomberg reported on Friday, the strategists do not expect the FTSE 100 to end the year above 9,000, the average being 8,950. If shares are likely to fall, it may not be a bad idea to sell a few before they do. To be clear, I am not predicting an October crash, but these are indeed tricky times and it would be nuts not to acknowledge that.
Daily Mail
4 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump launches 'Manhattan Project' as one of America's largest companies set to be nationalized
The Trump administration has launched their own 'Manhattan Project,' as reports have suggested one of America's largest chipmakers could be partly nationalized. Intel. Corp, one of the most capable semiconductor manufacturers in the US, has been in talks with the Trump administration as the US government is seeking a stake in the company. 'This feels like the Manhattan Project - or the run-up to World War II,' MIT AI computer scientist Dave Blundin said on a podcast with MIT engineer Peter Diamandis. 'It's every bit as important as the space race was, as the nuclear arms race was. Actually, it's more important.' The consideration to nationalize the company, a move typically done in times of national urgency, comes as the US is looking to get ahead of China in the AI and tech arms race. Intel's advanced abilities to manufacture semiconductors would allow the US to give up its reliance on foreign fabrication plants (fabs), especially in Taiwan which controls more than 60 percent of the market, in order to power artificial intelligence, defense and the economy. The talks remain ongoing and finer details continue to be made clear, but the idea would be that the US government would pay for the stake in the company, one person close to the matter told Bloomberg. Another stressed that the talks do not ensure that the deal is definitive, and the discussion could end without a deal being made. The move, according to AI and tech experts on Diamandis' podcast Moonshots, echoes the 'Manhattan Project' as a sort of a 'national survival strategy.' 'The reason the US needs to protect Taiwan fundamentally... is because the fabs are there. If the fabs all move to the US, then why would the US defend Taiwan?' Blundin said. Concerns have been raised about the decision to nationalize the company, as he added: 'They're putting the whole industry on a kind of war footing, like mobilization for conflict, except the battleground is supply chains and chip fabs.' Intel told Bloomberg, while declining to comment on the discussion with the Trump administration, that the company is 'deeply committed to supporting President Trump's efforts to strengthen US technology and manufacturing leadership.' 'We look forward to continuing our work with the Trump administration to advance these shared priorities, but we are not going to comment on rumors or speculation,' the company added. White House spokesman Kush Desai told the outlet: 'Discussion about hypothetical deals should be regarded as speculation unless officially announced by the administration.' The move comes after two AI companies agreed last week to hand over 15 percent of their chip sales revenue in China to the US government in exchange for export licenses. Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) entered an unprecedented arrangement with the White House to promote and sell their semiconductors in China last week, three people familiar with the situation told the Financial Times. 'In the short term, this is fantastic. In the long term, wow, could this turn bad in a hurry,' Blundin said. 'It's good for the US economy, but we're going to use that to fund [the] US catching up in the chip wars.' 'Very, very good business deal and incredibly slippery slope precedent.' The deal could pour more than $2 billion into the US government, the New York Times reported, although Trump did not reveal what the money may be used for. Just as sources say Trump and the AI companies entered the agreement, the president declared he would impose a 100 percent tariff on the imports of semiconductors and chips unless the company is 'building in the United States.' News of Trump's discreetly entered agreement with Nvidia and AMD has been slammed by experts who say the move could have detrimental repercussions when it comes to US-China relations. 'This is an own goal and will incentivize the Chinese to up their game and pressure the administration for more concessions,' Liza Tobin, who previously served as China director at the National Security Council, told The New York Times. The move to sell microchips to China has been heavily criticized, as many see it as a threat to national security and a move against America's best interests.
Daily Mail
4 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Veteran 'Superman' Li Ka-Shing could save Thames Water
The fate of crisis-torn Thames Water is set to be decided within weeks as Ministers prepare to effectively nationalise the troubled utilities firm before getting it ready for a sale. And the front-runner in any bidding war for the debt-laden supplier to 16 million customers in London and the Thames Valley is likely to be a business conglomerate controlled by one of Asia's richest men. Last week, reports emerged that CK Infrastructure (CKI), which also owns Northumbrian Water, had told the Government it was prepared to take over Thames imminently if it were to fall into special administration, buckling under the weight of £17 billion of debt. A successful takeover of Britain's largest water group would add another asset to the burgeoning portfolio of CKI's parent firm, CK Hutchison (CKH), which controls a globe-spanning empire encompassing pub chains, container ports and High Street stores. Behind it all is Li Ka-Shing, CKH's founder, considered the most successful tycoon in Hong Kong's history after amassing a fortune worth nearly £30 billion. The 97-year-old, who arrived in the British colony in 1940 aged 12 as a refugee from the Sino-Japanese war, is called 'Superman' by locals for his business acumen. Li is the firm's 'senior advisor' after stepping down as chairman in 2018 after 46 years at the helm. Despite his advanced years, the tycoon remains involved in the business and still goes into the office twice a week. He can also be spotted at the Tsz Shan Monastery, a ten-year-old Buddhist temple that Li financed to the tune of £142 million. CKH remains a family concern, with Li's son Victor serving as chairman. His UK empire includes the 226-year-old Greene King pub chain, bought for £4.6 billion in 2019 through one of the family's other businesses, CK Asset Holdings. Other assets include retailer Superdrug and UK Power Networks, the electricity grid operator for London and the South-East. CKH also owned mobile network Three before its merger with rival Vodafone earlier this year. It now controls just under half of the new business, which leapfrogged BT's EE to become Britain's biggest mobile phone provider. CKH's eyeing up of Thames Water comes as the conglomerate's British operations become increasingly profitable. Last week, CKH's half-year results saw underlying profits rise 11 per cent to £1.1 billion as sales rose to £22.6 billion from £21.8 billion in 2024. But overall profits fell 92 per cent to £80.3 million due to a one-off £983 million loss from the Vodafone-Three merger. Included in the figures were results from CKI, which is listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange but is controlled by CKH. CKI reported that its profits from the UK had jumped 19 per cent since last year thanks to 'higher contributions' from Northumbrian Water as well as its electricity grid arm and three British gas networks it also controls. Despite the firm's success in Britain, a swoop on Thames Water has sparked fear among those who are wary of handing over control of vital infrastructure to a Chinese company. On Thursday, former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith said a takeover by Li's firm risked handing 'a country that is a threat, greater power over national infrastructure'. It has also caused consternation in the US Congress. But Li's history is not all kowtowing to Beijing, with the tycoon having butted heads with China's communist authorities in the past. When Hong Kong saw a wave of pro-democracy protests in 2019, the government of the People's Republic accused Li of 'harbouring criminality' and allowing the city to 'slip into the abyss' when he called for police to show 'humanity' dealing with demonstrators. More recently, CKH has found itself caught in Donald Trump's trade war with China. Earlier this year, the company was forced to delay the sale of 43 ports, including two in the crucial Panama Canal, to a consortium backed by US asset manager BlackRock after Beijing criticised the deal. In its results, Victor Li said the firm expected global trade to 'remain volatile' as Trump's tariffs reverberated through the market. But despite the headwinds, CKH raised its half-year dividend by 3.2 per cent, landing the elder Li, who controls just over 28 per cent of the business, a £72 million payday. With Thames Water sinking under its own debt, Ministers may overlook CKH's Chinese ties in the absence of a better offer. Lower-ranking holders of Thames Water's debt are also understood to be keen on a long-term infrastructure owner such as CKH. The firm has reportedly said it would agree to new rules imposing tougher fines for breaking environmental regulations, which the water group's senior hedge fund creditors have said is financially unviable. Ministers will be hoping Hong Kong's 'Superman' can save the day.
