4 ms·
Sorting by capacity on the energy storage wiki, I had no idea that there's a 2.8 GWH compressed air plant in the US!
by travisporter 6y ago
Sorting by capacity on the energy storage wiki, I had no idea that there's a 2.8 GWH compressed air plant in the US!
- syncsynchalt 6y agoSame here. Looks like it's a combination gas + compressed air generator.
- credit_guy 6y agoIt's a bit of funny accounting. If someone says they have an energy storage facility with a capacity of 2.8GWh, you would expect to be able to store there 2.8 GWh worth of electricity and then be able to get back a large part of it, let's say 90%. This is how you think of a battery-based storage system. The facility described here is anything but that: you inject in a cavern a large quantity of air, and then, when needed, you get this air back under pressure and feed it to an old-fashioned gas-powered generator, who will burn old-fashioned gas for 26 hours and generate 110 MW electricity (26h * 110MW = 2.860 GWh). The generator will have higher efficiency, but pumping air at 1100 psi into a cavern doesn't happen for free, so all in all, it's not very clear how to compare this with a Tesla's Powerpack in Australia [1], which is listed at 129 MWh. [1] https://www.tesla.com/blog/tesla-powerpack-enable-large-scale-sustainable-energy-south-australia https://www.tesla.com/blog/tesla-powerpack-enable-large-scal...
- syncsynchalt 6y agoInterestingly the heat output of the gas turbine is also used to pre-heat the released air; it looks like this combo is what drives a lot of the gas+CAES efficiency. So you can't easily subtract gas from the equation.
- monadic2 6y agoWhat's the liquidity expected out of these power plants, e.g. how fast is the expected turnaround between pumping in and liquidating pumped energy?
- credit_guy 6y ago15 minutes.