Eleven months later, and new CIA research shows the pipeline of proposed storage has grown enormously, to over 26 GW of announced projects.
The individually enumerated projects in that article appear to be only a subset of those.
It's true about the Victorian battery you linked at a ratio of 1.5, so that has the 26GW representing somewhere in the range of 39GWh to 104GWh (ratios close to 2 appear to be the most common, though - presumably representing a current sweet spot of battery versus inverter pricing).
I believe the point still stands, though, which is that the suggested quantity of storage is an incremental advance on what's currently planned rather than some kind of moon shot.
Again, no capacity is actually specified for the vast majority of these proposals - it's the sort of things there if the capacity isn't good you have less incentive to share it, so assuming a ratio of 2-4 is very optimistic . And even if we assume that 100% of these proposals get built (which is unlikely) it's still well short of the 120GWh of capacity assumed by the study.
To put this in perspective, annual battery production is around 300-400 GWh. You're talking about redirecting a third of all battery output in a given year to produce the storage for a country of just 26 million people.
Eleven months later, and new CIA research shows the pipeline of proposed storage has grown enormously, to over 26 GW of announced projects.
The individually enumerated projects in that article appear to be only a subset of those.
It's true about the Victorian battery you linked at a ratio of 1.5, so that has the 26GW representing somewhere in the range of 39GWh to 104GWh (ratios close to 2 appear to be the most common, though - presumably representing a current sweet spot of battery versus inverter pricing).
I believe the point still stands, though, which is that the suggested quantity of storage is an incremental advance on what's currently planned rather than some kind of moon shot.