Batteries have output power capacities as well as storage capacity. For grid-scale applications it’s common to list both. The EIA announcement that this article is referencing only focused on power capacity, which is directly comparable to a traditional power plant. The EIA could have provided some additional information, but the article is technically correct and doesn’t mix units.

It’s a hell of a thing isn’t it, seeing a journalist speak nonsense this confidently

the chart is in GW, not GWh. energy would be more useful there, because these are entirely uncomparable things. NPPs work best at constant high power, batteries can run out in what, 2h at peak power, which might be what they have shown there

This is sadly par for the course in green tech articles. Journalists who flunked high school sciences should not be reporting on this stuff, or at least consult with someone who has even a passing knowledge of physics.

Now regarding actual storage amounts, I have noticed utilities seem to target around 4 hours of capacity at full discharge. That seems to be the sweet spot for lithium ion at least. So by that measure, 1 GW would translate to 4 GWh…ish.

These battery farms are more about dealing with spikes in power demand than bulk energy storage. This is still a valuable role in that they can replace peaker plants which are often low-efficiency diesel monstrosities, but we still need something else for the latter application. Mechanical storage schemes like pumped hydro come up a lot in that discussion, though it’s possible something like flow batteries might be a better fit for this than lithium ion if you want to go the battery route?

I’m not an expert on any of this though, so feel free to correct me.