4 ms·
How much air would you need to supply all the power required by all the homes in California? Here's my attempt to answer that question: The first stop is to g
by robomartin 14y ago
How much air would you need to supply all the power required by all the homes in California?
Here's my attempt to answer that question:
The first stop is to get a sense of what the realistic energy density of these approaches might be. A quick search lands you here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed_air_energy_storage#Energy_density_and_efficiency http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed_air_energy_storage#E...
My take-away: 1 m3 of air = about 300,000 J
How much energy does a typical house in the US use per day?
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_electricity_does_an_average_2-story_3-bedroom_house_use_per_day_per_month_or_per_year http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_electricity_does_an_avera...
I'll use 50KWh per day
1kWh = 1,000W x 3,600s = 3,600,000J
This typical house, then, consumes 180,000,000J per day
How much air do we need to compress to provide all of the energy needs of this one house (per day)?
180,000,000J / 300,000J = 600 m3
How many homes in California?
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06037.html http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06037.html
Let's say it's about 14,000,000 homes
How much air do we have to compress every day to service these homes:
600 m3 x 14,000,000 homes = 8,400,000,000 m3
OK, there's a number, whatever it means.
Hmmm. How much of the available air are we using?
What's the volume of air of the atmosphere?
Tough question to answer. I think the number we'd want would be that of the Troposphere.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Earth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Earth
I am going to use an over-simplification (you know, "assume a cow is a uniform sphere of milk" type stuff) to try to get a number. Sphere within a sphere to get the volume of the troposphere.
Average Earth diameter: 12,742km
http://www.universetoday.com/15055/diameter-of-earth/ http://www.universetoday.com/15055/diameter-of-earth/
Troposphere thickness: 17km
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troposphere http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troposphere
Troposphere volume: 4,341,334,943,758,290,000 m3
That means that California would use 0.00000019% of the troposphere per day if every single home was powered using compressed air energy storage.
Put a different way: It would take nearly 1.5 million years to process all of the air in the troposphere.
I'm not sure if the above is complete nonsense or not. The problem is far more complex than these quickie calculations might suggest. On first inspection it sounds like we have plenty of air to go around.
Would there be any environmental and/or air quality issues stemming from this approach? Do we end-up with cleaner air locally because of the process?
Interesting stuff.
.
EDIT: A few more data points.
How big of a container is required to store all of this air?
The original assumption was that 1 m3 of air would compress into a 5L bottle, or 0.005 m3.
Storage cube side length: 348m
Storage sphere diameter: 431m
How much would this much air weigh?
1 m3 of air at 20C = 1.204 kg
8,400,000,000 m3 = 10,113,600,000 kg
The question, for me, begins to be about how realistic it might be to construct enough smaller storage vessels to capture this volume safely.
The article mentions something about 40ft standard shipping containers. Assuming that the storage vessel has the internal dimensions of a standard 40ft container:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermodal_container http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermodal_container
Container volume: ~ 67 m3
Containers required to store enough compressed air to supply homes in California: ~627,000 units.
That's a lot of containers, even if the calculations are off by 100%.
- jacquesm 14y agoOne small correction. This is akin to a battery, so there is a 'charge' and a 'discharge' cycle, you'd be using the charge cycle when there is an excess and the discharge when you need more than is available or when the price of your stored energy is lower than what you'd be buying from the grid. So likely while you're charging (I'm assuming that's the better part of a day) you're not consuming from the device. So your 50KWh initial value is more likely only half of that or even less, the portion that you'd be consuming that was previously stored. I've lived off a 48KWh lead/acid battery and it would - in a very energy efficient home - power the house for up to 5 days before needing a top-up absent sufficient sun and wind. This still holds when the storage capacity is centralized, only the flow would be slightly different and the houses would be in 'sink' mode all the time. Another point regarding consumption: Conservation is the best possible starting point for any renewable installation, large scale or small scale does not matter. It is easier to save a KWh than it is to generate or store one, up to a point, so that low hanging fruit is where you start.
- robomartin 14y agoYes, of course, you wouldn't use compressed air storage for power 24/7. I just went for worst case to see where the numbers would lead. > Conservation is the best possible starting point Couldn't agree more. I happen to think that this is where we've failed miserably over the years. Homes are just not built to be efficient, despite what the propaganda might indicate.
- pyoung 14y agoI disagree with you on your point on efficiency. California has had a ton of success implementing efficiency programs, and these efforts are starting to be copied by other states. My guess is that your perception of failure is largely driven by the McMansion trend of the 90's/early 00's. While these large, suburban homes definitely consume more energy than their smaller counterparts, if it wasn't for strict codes and standards and minimum efficiency requirements for appliances, our energy situation would look much worse.
- lutorm 14y ago