허베이성 런추(Renqiu)는 중국 최초의 리튬·나트륨 복합 에너지저장 국가 시범단지 중 하나이며, 보고서는 790Ah를 포함한 대형 셀 선택이 발전소 수익 모델에 의해 결정된다고 분석했다.

*Author: Foresight Energy (预见能源). Republished with authorization from TMTPost (钛媒体).*

A 100MW/400MWh standalone energy storage project in Renqiu, Hebei, has recently drawn industry attention. The project is modest in scale but notable in standing. It is one of the first pilot projects in China to combine lithium iron phosphate (LFP) and sodium-ion technology routes. It will build a 220kV step-up substation to connect directly to the regional main grid, and grid-connection performance and control reliability are set as hard requirements. The LFP lot was won by Envision Power (远景动力), which will deploy its 790Ah prismatic wound cells.

Against the backdrop of the capacity price mechanism taking effect in 2026 and Hebei's tighter list-based management, the significance of this award lies not in being "yet another large-cell project," but in offering a model of rules making the choice for the station.

Over the past two years, the narrative around large cells has been shaped mainly by suppliers, who competed to push capacity figures higher and announce mass production first. Renqiu signals a different direction. When discharge duration is written into the capacity price conversion formula, and when dispatch assessment focuses on every kilowatt-hour delivered, cell size is increasingly determined by the station's revenue model rather than by the cell's dimensions alone.

To understand why the Renqiu project chose Envision Power and why Envision Power focuses on 790Ah, one must first see how the rules turn cell capacity from a "selling point" into a "calculation point."

**From "Selling Point" to "Calculation Point": Capacity Pricing Reframes Cell Capacity**

In January 2026, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) and the National Energy Administration (NEA) issued the *Notice on Improving the Capacity Price Mechanism on the Generation Side*, which for the first time brought grid-side standalone new-type energy storage into the national capacity price system. The core logic is as follows: the capacity price is based on the local coal-fired capacity price benchmark, multiplied by a conversion ratio. The numerator is the continuous full-power discharge duration, and the denominator is the duration of the longest annual net-load peak, with the ratio capped at 1. In other words, if a station cannot sustain output through the peak period, its capacity payment is discounted. A 2-hour storage system is structurally disadvantaged under this ratio, and only systems of 4 hours or longer can approach full payment.

For the first time, storage assets have a stable income resembling a "base salary." But the size of that base depends on whether the cell allows the system to keep delivering power through the tightest hours of the year.

What truly writes "operating performance" into capacity payment deductions is not any single dispatch-call assessment, but the dual screening formed by the conversion formula in Document No. 114 and the grid-performance access requirements in Document No. 418 [2026] issued by the Hebei Provincial Development and Reform Commission (Ji Fa Gai Neng [2026] No. 418). The capacity price provisions of Document 114 mean that capacity payments are not "paid once installed." They depend on whether the station can hold rated power continuously during the tightest periods of the year.

Document 418 pushes this logic into operations. Projects must "support continuous, smooth regulation within the rated power range and precisely respond to dispatch instructions for peak shaving, frequency regulation and peak capacity support." Projects that fail to meet dispatch requirements during operation must rectify them promptly, and projects not on the list may not receive capacity prices.

The conversion formula governs whether a station can reach the peak; grid access requirements govern whether it can be dispatched effectively. Combined, availability and response accuracy are no longer soft metrics on an operations log. They are hard constraints on whether capacity payments can be settled in full.

The Renqiu project sits exactly at the intersection of these dual constraints. With a 220kV step-up substation connecting directly to the main grid, and with LFP and sodium-ion storage needing to coordinate under a single control system, the project's requirements for grid-connection performance, operational stability and control reliability are publicly reported as thresholds above those of conventional projects.

Under these conditions, cell count is itself a source of system risk. For a 1GWh station, moving from a 314Ah scheme (about 995,000 cells) to a 790Ah scheme (about 396,000 cells) reduces not only material costs but also the number of connection points, sampling harnesses and potential failure nodes, by an order of magnitude.

When Document 418 writes "precise response to dispatch instructions" and "timely rectification" into the conditions for remaining on the list, and Document 114 directly multiplies sustained discharge capability during peak periods into the capacity price, every additional connection point in the system stops being a technical story for integrators. It becomes a subtraction on the station owner's capacity payment settlement statement.

**Large Cells Have Been Calling for "Bigger" for Two Years, but Stations Really Need "Fewer"**

After 314Ah, the fragmentation of large-cell specifications has been a publicly acknowledged awkwardness. In the range above 500Ah, multiple companies are promoting their own formats, and no broadly accepted standard has emerged. From the supplier side, this is a battle for position. From the station side, the more fragmented the specifications, the more each selection resembles a bet.

Envision Power's move on 790Ah offers a reference case in which a supplier proactively returns the power to define specifications to the system side.

**790Ah: Rated Capacity, Energy Density and Efficiency**

The 790Ah cell has a rated capacity of 790Ah and energy of 2,528Wh, with volumetric energy density exceeding 440Wh/L, a cycle life of over 15,000 cycles and a DC round-trip efficiency of 96%. These parameters do not constitute a conclusion on their own. What matters is their effect once placed in a system. In a 1GWh station using the 790Ah scheme, cell count falls from about 995,000 (314Ah scheme) to about 396,000, a reduction of roughly 60%. Station balance-of-plant (BOP) savings exceed 15 million yuan per GWh, the site footprint shrinks by about 37.6%, and infrastructure and cabling costs drop by about 50%.

The significance of these figures is not in piling up specifications, but in showing that when capacity pricing and dispatch assessment tighten at the same time, stations are willing to pay for "fewer connection points, lower failure probability and a simpler system." As cell count falls, connection points, sampling harnesses and potential failure nodes decline in step, and system complexity is compressed. This marks a shift in the competitive dimension of large cells: from "how much energy each cell holds" toward "how far system complexity can be reduced."

The Renqiu case shows that in highly constrained, long-duration, grid-intensive projects, cell specifications must serve the system's revenue model, not merely the production line's rhythm. Envision Power's 790Ah is in focus not because its number is the largest, but because in this scenario it translates "bigger" into "fewer" and "more calculable."

Beyond parameters and system economics, there is a harder hurdle: whether the cell can be mass-produced and delivered.

**From Launch to Delivery: The 790Ah Outcome Hinges on Mass Production**

Between product launch and engineering delivery lies a gap that many companies have not crossed.

Envision Power's 790Ah cells entered scaled delivery in early 2026, and the Cangzhou Super Factory has already achieved mass-production delivery. The Yichang Super Factory began operations in July 2026 with a phase-one planned capacity of 40GWh. The first 790Ah cells from Yichang have shipped to Germany, and more than 50% of its capacity is locked in by overseas customer orders. The Renqiu project is supplied locally from the Cangzhou production line, which shortens not only supply-chain response time but also gives follow-up operations and the replication of engineering experience a nearby reference point.

However, Foresight Energy does not believe the Renqiu award establishes that "790Ah will become mainstream," nor can a single project prove that specifications are converging. What it offers is an evidence point at which rules, traced backward, begin to produce engineering consequences. Capacity pricing converts discharge duration into revenue, dispatch assessment constrains equipment through availability, and grid-connection requirements put system complexity on the table. Once that happens, the power to define cell capacity no longer rests entirely with suppliers.

Envision Power's role in the Renqiu case is to take the specification derived from these rules and deliver it through mass production and actual delivery, giving the rules' choices a traceable physical counterpart. If more highly constrained projects adopt similar selection logic, the scoring rules of the large-cell competition are indeed shifting: from "who announces the biggest number first" to "who can make the number computable by the system."

Renqiu is a starting point, not an answer.

*For more, follow TMTPost on WeChat (ID: taimeiti) or download the TMTPost app.*