Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

Exiled_Tyke

I'm not sure how I feel about this one, but perhaps some of that is bias on my part because of the recent controversial history of power stations in this area. (Ferrybridge, Eggborough and infamous Drax stetch out over around 20miles along the Ouse/M62 corridor.  

My scepticism may be well founded 'hydrogen capable' doesn't necessarily mean it will run on hydrogen (is there even enough currently/planned to be produced to run this site?). Furthermore, the article goes on to state that the station can also use natural gas.  Is this greenwashing to get approval or am I just too cynical?  

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce84zr14xe5o

QrizB

Exiled_Tyke said:

My scepticism may be well founded 'hydrogen capable' doesn't necessarily mean it will run on hydrogen (is there even enough currently/planned to be produced to run this site?).

I share your scepticism.

I'd be more convinced if they'd announced a green hydrogen (eg. electrolysis) plant at the same time. The site has a good connection to the grid which could be used to soak up surplus wind-generated electricity to make hydrogen, then reversed to supply hydrogen-derived electricity when winds are low.

But as presented, it looks more like a Trojan horse for a new CCGT.

Netexporter

Exiled_Tyke said:

I'm not sure how I feel about this one, but perhaps some of that is bias on my part because of the recent controversial history of power stations in this area. (Ferrybridge, Eggborough and infamous Drax stetch out over around 20miles along the Ouse/M62 corridor.  

My scepticism may be well founded 'hydrogen capable' doesn't necessarily mean it will run on hydrogen (is there even enough currently/planned to be produced to run this site?). Furthermore, the article goes on to state that the station can also use natural gas.  Is this greenwashing to get approval or am I just too cynical?  

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce84zr14xe5o

I share your scepticism.

Redundant coal (and gas) power station sites could be key economic sites. They already have a big grid connection, so you could site battery storage, for grid regulation, and longer term CAES storage there/ The much vaunted data centres would also be a good fit because they will have an uninterruptable power supply. The waste heat from the data centre could be used for re0gassifying the air in the CAES storage and also intensified by high temperature heat pumps to provide process heat for clusters of industry.

The trouble is there is no imagination, or long term planning, in this country.

Exiled_Tyke

Netexporter said:

Exiled_Tyke said:

I'm not sure how I feel about this one, but perhaps some of that is bias on my part because of the recent controversial history of power stations in this area. (Ferrybridge, Eggborough and infamous Drax stetch out over around 20miles along the Ouse/M62 corridor.  

My scepticism may be well founded 'hydrogen capable' doesn't necessarily mean it will run on hydrogen (is there even enough currently/planned to be produced to run this site?). Furthermore, the article goes on to state that the station can also use natural gas.  Is this greenwashing to get approval or am I just too cynical?  

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce84zr14xe5o

I share your scepticism.

Redundant coal (and gas) power station sites could be key economic sites. They already have a big grid connection, so you could site battery storage, for grid regulation, and longer term CAES storage there/ The much vaunted data centres would also be a good fit because they will have an uninterruptable power supply. The waste heat from the data centre could be used for re0gassifying the air in the CAES storage and also intensified by high temperature heat pumps to provide process heat for clusters of industry.

The trouble is there is no imagination, or long term planning, in this country.

I like your thinking.  This kind of repurposing to battery storage is what happened at Uskmouth (after plans for biomass & plastic burning fell through).   The data centre idea is an even cleverer one, but like you think, I doubt could take off here.  

greenbee

Exiled_Tyke said:

Netexporter said:

Exiled_Tyke said:

I'm not sure how I feel about this one, but perhaps some of that is bias on my part because of the recent controversial history of power stations in this area. (Ferrybridge, Eggborough and infamous Drax stetch out over around 20miles along the Ouse/M62 corridor.  

My scepticism may be well founded 'hydrogen capable' doesn't necessarily mean it will run on hydrogen (is there even enough currently/planned to be produced to run this site?). Furthermore, the article goes on to state that the station can also use natural gas.  Is this greenwashing to get approval or am I just too cynical?  

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce84zr14xe5o

I share your scepticism.

Redundant coal (and gas) power station sites could be key economic sites. They already have a big grid connection, so you could site battery storage, for grid regulation, and longer term CAES storage there/ The much vaunted data centres would also be a good fit because they will have an uninterruptable power supply. The waste heat from the data centre could be used for re0gassifying the air in the CAES storage and also intensified by high temperature heat pumps to provide process heat for clusters of industry.

The trouble is there is no imagination, or long term planning, in this country.

I like your thinking.  This kind of repurposing to battery storage is what happened at Uskmouth (after plans for biomass & plastic burning fell through).   The data centre idea is an even cleverer one, but like you think, I doubt could take off here.  

There's a lot of talk in the data center world about on-site generation (primarily in the US) amid concerns about grid reliability. So if any of the hyperscalers want to get into the energy business these ideas may well happen. Amazon may evolve again - started as a bookseller - then became a logistics business - then a tech giant - next stop energy provider?

Coastalwatch

Martyn1981 said:

Thought this was very interesting. It's a large scale MDES (medium duration energy storage) project, using A-CAES (advanced compressed air energy storage). CAES has the potential for vast amounts of energy storage, providing long term storage. In the UK, we could potentially roll out 10's of TWh of LDES with CAES. The same may be true for green H2 (produced with the excess RE), but A-CAES has the potential for ~65% or better RTE (round trip efficiency), whereas H2 is probably lower (and more complicated). Both would use vast underground storage, such as old FF wells, or saline caverns.

For now, LDES is not needed, but it's great to see A-CAES being developed and tested, as that will help guide us for LDES roles.

Advanced compressed air energy storage: Hydrostor secures US$55 million for 1.6GWh Australia project

Hydrostor has secured US$55 million in funding from Export Development Canada (EDC) to advance development activities for its 200MW/1,600MWh Silver City Energy Storage Centre project in Broken Hill, New South Wales, Australia.

According to the Toronto-based long-duration energy storage (LDES) developer, the advanced compressed air energy storage (A-CAES) project will be capable of powering the entire town without a direct connection to the National Electricity Market (NEM).

It will operate as backup generation during planned or unplanned outages to prevent blackouts.

The Silver City Energy Storage Centre will provide eight hours of storage duration at full output capacity. It is designed to replace ageing diesel generators nearing end-of-life while providing crucial grid stability services to the broader network.

Hydrostor’s CEO, Curtis VanWalleghem, said the EDC funding advances their Silver City project while demonstrating growing global support for long-duration energy storage, particularly their A-CAES technology.

I have to say I like the idea of using CAES, be it advanced or otherwise and please don't get me wrong but just how likely is it that underground storage caverns, mines etc can be sealed to enable pressure to not only build up but remain so once the pumps have stopped running?

The pressure built up would be considerable, perhaps, dare I say akin to fracking where leaks could occur anywhere so all the energy used would then be lost.

Sorry to question the idea, I'd just appreciate understanding how something as vast as a mine previously dug out of the earth and perhaps regularly flooding could bee considered for such? 

QrizB

Coastalwatch said

I have to say I like the idea of using CAES, be it advanced or otherwise and please don't get me wrong but just how likely is it that underground storage caverns, mines etc can be sealed to enable pressure to not only build up but remain so once the pumps have stopped running?

The pressure built up would be considerable, perhaps, dare I say akin to fracking where leaks could occur anywhere so all the energy used would then be lost.

Sorry to question the idea, I'd just appreciate understanding how something as vast as a mine previously dug out of the earth and perhaps regularly flooding could bee considered for such? 

It's easier to explain if you think of a flooded mineshaft.

So, think of a vertical shaft that's 1000 metres deep. At the bottom of that shaft, the pressure is equal to the pressure due to a column of water that's 1000 metres tall. That's 100 atmospheres (bar). This pressure applies all over the bottom of the shaft, but as rock is an essentially-incompressible solid nothing happens.

Next, put an empty party balloon on the end of a 1000-metre-long pipe. Push it down the flooded mineshaft.

Now try to inflate the balloon from the surface. You'll have to blow air into the top of the pipe at 100 bar , in order to overcome the pressure of the water.

The pressure on the walls of the mineshaft, however, won't change. It's still 100 bar.