So what do you think about liquid air energy storage? If you liked this video, be sure to check out, "Supercapacitors explained - the future of energy storage?" kzitem.info/news/bejne/jm2Kk2qOnZuDh6w
@AlecMuller
4 жыл бұрын
Underwater CAES is also interesting. You get the dual benefit of the weight of the water acting as your pressure vessel, and the benefit of water acting as a heat sink. The slower you charge / discharge, the closer it is to isothermal. www.renewableenergyworld.com/2014/09/16/underwater-compressed-air-storage-fantasy-or-reality/
@fjalics
4 жыл бұрын
Can you visit one of these and do a followup when they get it built? Please?
@makisekurisu4674
4 жыл бұрын
SO what is the final savings compared to the other options and at what scale will it be profitable?
@MrYevelnad
4 жыл бұрын
Do air stop during night time? No. So why not just build more wind turbine.
@117johnpar
4 жыл бұрын
As soon as you mentioned using power for phase changing and generating power off of changing phases back from a generator I knew the Efficiency and yield loss would be ridiculous. I would also assume the maintenance, manpower and scientific specialties needed to maintain the liquid energy plant would be very significantly greater than that of a hardline batterybank plant. The CEO talked about miliwatt per dollar efficiency being the efficiency that matters. But I think that still puts them on the short end of the economic stick. Perhaps it makes sense for a major metropolitan city where another massive plant fully staffed isnt as big a deal as other places.
@davidmay268
4 жыл бұрын
I'm in Manchester UK, there's one a few miles from here. Another advantage is that the engineering and construction skills are not too different from the oil and gas industry, so skills can be carried over as we phase those out.
@UndecidedMF
4 жыл бұрын
Excellent point! Simple transfer of skills.
@johnnyb1843
4 жыл бұрын
Also the hardware is 'off_the_shelf' and therefore should encourage those who might otherwise be put off by this 'technology'.
@a22024
4 жыл бұрын
There is no phasing out fossil fuels if you want modern tech
@phodgson1980
4 жыл бұрын
Yeah. I only really see upsides for this tech. Like you said, transfer of skills. Off the shelf components. Dial-able efficiency. Scalable. Cost competitive. Geographically mobile. Team a large plant like this with a battery farm and you have a perfect combination. Power sources (solar, wind) feed the LAES system. LAES system feeds the batter farm which supplies the millisecond response necessary for the grid. The battery farm would only need to be big enough to cover the gap until the LAES system can catch up... and boom goes the dynamite.
@Muppetkeeper
4 жыл бұрын
Some of the footage in this video could have been Warrington, it looked grim and it was raining :-)
@petertownsend252
4 жыл бұрын
Great video. You really dialed in and captured my thoughts and sentiments on the merits of liquid air energy storage. The merits of the science, technology, materials, and costs almost speak for themselves. I would definitely like to see some more investigation and follow up on the unanswered questions. Some suggested topics for follow up: It seems like a liquid air storage system should be co-located and symbiotically paired with the intermittent energy source (solar / wind) supplying the liquid air plant with power. I could imagine a fully integrated gigawatt scale solar / liquid air plant that is designed, engineered, marketed, and sold under a common brand as a turn key product supplying power 24/7 365 days a year. The most obvious choice would be the acquisition and merger of a liquid air storage company with a gigawatt scale solar or wind company. However, such a merger might prove hostile to existing business relationships with the electric utility industry which would likely prefer to see liquid air energy storage technology killed in the cradle than as to begin competing with it for baseload market share. It would be great if you could score an interview with a large established solar or wind company to explore their thoughts on pairing their product with liquid air energy storage. Location. Location. Location. Expand the focus beyond the merits of the technology and its associated costs to grid access. A liquid air system dumping megawatts of power into the grid would likely need to be co-located next to an existing power plant with grid connection infrastructure or next to an abandoned power plant with existing grid connection infrastructure. Cases in point, In 2003 "First Solar" co-located a utility scale 480 kW PV solar system adjacent to the coal fired Springerville Generating Station operated by Tucson Electric Power in Springerville, Arizona. Tesla's new Moss Landing megapack battery storage system is being installed at the former natural gas fired Moss Landing Power Plant site. Examine the likely regulatory hurdles and challenges to connect a new independent wildcat 24/7 baseload power source to the grid. The regulatory burdens and financial costs may be insurmountable in the US. The utility and the broader utility lobbying industry would immediately go to the mattresses to tie up and protect any potential threat to existing baseload generating capacity. Possession being nine-tenths of the law, the first and easiest thing would be to deny property access, easements, and permits necessary to connect to the grid. A small grid connected project in a foreign country might be the better pace to start rather than a predictable hostile engagement with the US electric utility industry.
@johnj8639
4 жыл бұрын
I find it hard to believe it’s worth storing the hot and cold energy from the process, I’d imagine it would easily cool or heat up during the day and be fairly useless by the time it’s actually needed at night. There are also other air energy storage facilities currently in use in the US, they don’t freeze it though, they just cool it and store it underground. You wouldn’t want these liquid air storage tanks to heat up too much or they’ll explode, so there must be a lot of energy going into make sure they stay cold, problems traditional air energy storage facilities don’t have.
@franciscoshi1968
4 жыл бұрын
This could also be used to generate industrial gases as a byproduct. My guess is that removing argon neon CO2 and maybe oxygen for industrial purposes could also add to the value of the plant.
@user-wy4mp9ts3u
4 жыл бұрын
There is always ways of making it more efficient,one way to have a greater number of compression steps,each step releasing the heat energy(even if that heat energy is in the cryogenic range) before being compressed yet again thereby reducing the resistance to compression therefore the work needed to do so,and vice versa when doing work with the compressed gas to create say electricity multiple stages of turbo decompression(with intermittent heating)will ensure maximum efficiency.Perhaps they are doing this already to some degree I would be surprised if they are not but more is better.Heat source can be ambient air or some low cost source and conversely cooling can also be some low cost source such as cold water. If compression and decompression are taking place at the same time in the same place this also becomes a source of low cost heating or cooling.
@desicoder8527
4 жыл бұрын
Great video, a possible reason why they may not be preferred is the 60% efficiency, that effectively means you are still left with 40% curtailment. so at that point you might as well go hydrogen with combined cycle combustion with the added advantage of transport ability. that said, if its cheap enough hell yeah. I do keep hearing about the Ambri liquid metal battery from MIT for grid storage & it does comes within same cost ballpark so that may be a better overall solution. IMO it may be worth doing a video on it.
@mikep9690
3 жыл бұрын
The real answer to energy storage is molten salt. Solar farms should be infrared instead of ultraviolet. 48% of Solar energy to just 8% . Thermal produces 6 times as much as Solar panels. Salt has as much latent heat as water, so we just melt a tram full of salt at over 1000 degrees C and roll it down a tunnel for storage The other end of the tunnel would be the power plant The salt will stay molten for months once the surrounding earth has heated up to match
@brett4264
4 жыл бұрын
Even with a search, I couldn't find your "flow batteries" video. The link you promised wasn't there.
@z4zuse
4 жыл бұрын
kzitem.info/news/bejne/xqec4KttbIVedGU
@MrFoxRobert
4 жыл бұрын
Thank you!
@UndecidedMF
4 жыл бұрын
You're welcome!
@tomkelly8827
4 жыл бұрын
Ice is another cheap and valuable form of energy storage and it much simpler to make then liquid air
@EgnachHelton
4 жыл бұрын
I wonder how do you recycle heat (or lack of heat) though. Doesn't the laws of thermodynamics prevent this?
@stevemickler452
4 жыл бұрын
While making liquid air benefits from economy of scale, one can imagine making it on site at truck stops and having trucks that could then store and use it. Especially good for refrigerated trucks since cooling is a by product. Solar air heating panels on the trailer could increase the range perhaps. Perhaps this could be practical for cars as well. I have seen compressed air powered cars developed but this would have better range and the tank might cost less. If I was GM I'd really think about leveraging my hybrid tech and coming out with a liquid air battery electric since the turbine, generator and electric drive train are definitely in their wheelhouse. They could tout recharging as fast as gassing up.
@gibmebalut
4 жыл бұрын
The cost of small cryo units is prohibitive compared to distribution the product from large facilities. The equipment involved in the process is very maintenance intensive. Even heavy consumers of liquid nitrogen like refineries have it trucked in. If you wanted to use it to cool refer trucks filled at stops, you’d end up just shipping it to the stops and storing it in tanks.
@stevemickler452
4 жыл бұрын
@@gibmebalut Thanks so much for that input. I wonder though if medium sized units could be made that overcome some of the cost issues although trucking the stuff from a large plant near an urban area to gas stations equipped with equipment to keep it cool might be practical. If I was GM I might try to do something to overcome the drawbacks.
@gibmebalut
4 жыл бұрын
@@stevemickler452 The good thing about cryo storage tanks is that they don't need extra equipment to keep the product cool. The vacuum jacketing is very effective. As a matter of fact, If product is withdrawn from the tank regularly, a small amount of the product needs to be boiled off in a heat exchanger to keep the tank pressure up.
@stevemickler452
4 жыл бұрын
@@gibmebalut Thanks. Good to know.
@7heRedBaron
4 жыл бұрын
If you are going to cool and liquify air, why wouldn’t you use surplus power to create hydrogen through electrolysis and then cool and liquify the hydrogen? Obviously, such systems are in development too. But like the guest stated in this video, the choices are all going to be determined by some bean counter with an Excel spreadsheet who makes the simple determination that this one is cheaper or more efficient or requires lower investment than that one and choice made. But considering that we have been willing to journey to the most inhospitable depths of the Arctic to drill for petroleum and transport it in heated pipelines for thousands of miles, environment and habitat be damned, for a one time combustion to power our K-cup machines every morning, the solution certainly seems to be sitting in front of us.
@kedaruss
4 жыл бұрын
So what is the cost per MWh @60% efficiency? I'm asking about the installation cost.
@fotoguru222
4 жыл бұрын
The cost is more dependent on MW than on MWH. How big a turbine do you need? The tanks to add MWH are the cheapest part.
@RoyaltyFreeVideoClips
4 жыл бұрын
They could put the tanks underground for cooling
@cooper1507
4 жыл бұрын
4:00 dude is vampire
@bazoo513
4 жыл бұрын
Sorry for nitpicking, Matt, but again: "rare earth metals" ("rare earth elements", actually, by IUPAC) does not simply mean "rare" or "expensive" or "difficult to procure" metals. The term is precisely defined as denoting lanthanides plus scandium and yttrium - certainly not lithium, cobalt nor nickel. None of those are used in batteries, AFAIK, although some _are_ used in permanent magnet motors (and generators), usually neodymium. Perhaps that's the source of seemingly endless misuse of the term.
@d1oftwins
4 жыл бұрын
Thank you. I am tired of the same rare-earth-myth being misused and spreading misinformation over and over and over...! At this point it is not nitpicking, it is a concession that people just believe things without questioning them not bothering with a quick lookup if that information has some validity to it or whether it is pure bogus or something in-between.
@bazoo513
4 жыл бұрын
@@d1oftwins Yes, talking science and technology requires precision. If one is going to use technical jargon of a particular field, one should use it correctly.
@EscapeMCP
4 жыл бұрын
4:46 Also on the nitpicking front the air isn't frozen, it's condensed. Frozen air would be a solid but you clearly said it's stored as a liquid. You'd have to get down to -210°C (for the Nitrogen) and -218°C (Oxygen) for it to freeze.
@bazoo513
4 жыл бұрын
@@EscapeMCP Yeah, again "loose" use of words that has no place in videos like this one. Frozen air would be a nice "reservoir of coldness" (heat sink), but that's not what is needed here. (Frozen nitrogen is sometimes used as coolant in space-based telescopes - lighter per energy absorption capability than liquid helium, and much simpler than active refrigeration systems.)
@grindupBaker
4 жыл бұрын
Yes. You'll not stop it of course. People & groups have decided what's simple catch phrases for the masses for various things and they are soon promulgated, ingrained and thus the confusion will be permanent. It annoys me too but I realize that that's Life.
@pixifixi2076
3 жыл бұрын
"You can have whatever efficiency you want" Entropy has entered the chat: Ahem!
@robymaru03
3 жыл бұрын
Entropy is our biggest enemy.
@Verrisin
3 жыл бұрын
@@robymaru03 Fighting entropy is easy. You just need to turn little girls into monstrous witches. Duh.
@ronwesilen4536
3 жыл бұрын
@@fealdorf recommend me some anime random stranger. I like good animation
@Teadon86
3 жыл бұрын
@@ronwesilen4536 Sorry to butt in but I can't help myself atm. Black Lagoon, Trigun, Overlord, Beastars, Oddtaxi, Vampire Hunter D, One Punch Man, Cowboy Bepop, Mushishi, FLCL, Great Teacher Onizuka, Hellsing, Serial Experiments Lain, Ookami to Koushinryou (Spice and Wolf), Escaflowne, .Hack//Sign, Last Exile, Eureka Seven, Kino and Tegami Bachi.
@ronwesilen4536
3 жыл бұрын
@@Teadon86 oh mai, this is great, thanks!
@SidharthSatheesh
4 жыл бұрын
This was one of my university presentation 9 years ago ☺️
@SidharthSatheesh
4 жыл бұрын
@@rogerstarkey5390 one of if not the best way for large scale energy storage.
@sabilaahmad3731
4 жыл бұрын
How about result heat in process is charging and powering? any publication?
@harshrahate9877
4 жыл бұрын
Can you describe this storage in 4 lines
@brokenjava11
4 жыл бұрын
@@harshrahate9877 fucking stupid. try falling water, Or nuclear, ps, communism is as stupid as a wind turbine.
@harshrahate9877
4 жыл бұрын
@@brokenjava11 this idea is stupid? How?
@olyalphy
4 жыл бұрын
So what did the $/MWh cost boil down to? How does it compare to current grid scale Lithium Ion battery technology. I love your channel but this just came across as a fluff piece without real analysis and numbers.
@ktaragorn
4 жыл бұрын
Agree, the CEO particularly stressed the importance of this number, but then we still dont see it.
@tobias8814
4 жыл бұрын
"Using industry-standard economic methodologies, it has been determined that the VPS Cycle has the lowest Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) of any power storage system available today. VPS’s LCOE is typically $125-$135/MWh versus $200-$400/MWh for compressed air energy storage (CAES); $185-$275/MWh for pumped hydro; and $350- $750/MWh for lithium ion batteries (in each case assuming a power “charging” price of $50/MWh). VPS’s LCOE is also lower than simple-cycle peaker plants ($220- $300/MWh)." I found here: www.expansion-energy.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/POWER-GEN__-Expansion_Energy_LLC-__VPS_Cycle_LAES_Technical_Paper_-_FINAL_DRAFT.33873916.pdf I don't know if this is a reliable source.
@G11713
4 жыл бұрын
@@tobias8814 what is VPS?
@phodgson1980
4 жыл бұрын
@@G11713 I think it's liquid air energy storage (LAES) using the VPS cycle (Vandor's Power Storage Cycle). Found this link: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140700719304748
@Ikbeneengeit
4 жыл бұрын
Around $100 per MWh. Combined with $40/MWh wind, this is dispatchable power that is price competitive with natural gas peakers ($150/MWh) www.rechargenews.com/transition/liquid-air-storage-offers-cheapest-route-to-24-hour-wind-and-solar/2-1-635666
@Larpy1933
4 жыл бұрын
You are often confusing power and energy. I hear you say “megawatt” for energy storage. That’s like saying the grocery store is “5 mph” away, when you mean “5 miles” away. I know this is driving many of your viewers crazy and lots of people comment on it. To further beat a dead horse, power is an instantaneous measure of energy flow. A kW can’t do any work; it’s not a unit of energy. Just like 60mph won’t get you anywhere unless you travel at that speed for a millisecond, an hour or a week. Then you’ll have travelled some fraction of a mile. Or multiple (or thousands) of miles. That’s analogous to energy.
@ockamrazor477
4 жыл бұрын
Mwh or max demand, believe mwh. Telephone game condensate
@maxi-me
4 жыл бұрын
Larry, well put,. It's an important distinction I see abused frequently and wonder sometimes if it isn't done intentionally to exaggerate the attributes. BTW, my alternative extrapolation: "This barbell weighs 650 calories"
@joseylastborn8790
4 жыл бұрын
Hibridised with high grade heat turbines the output is greater than sum significantly. This increases value of imported cyrogenic fluids to cool reactor steam. Nitrogen is an open loop flow booster for micronuclear reducing number needed.
@joseylastborn8790
4 жыл бұрын
👍 domestic uranium to heat imported from canary geothermal LIQUID air is the sterling engine fodder aspiration deltamaxing 🍵 totter. Fission is the catalyst DUH.
@joseylastborn8790
4 жыл бұрын
I call the bluff! Cooling tanks WHERE right DESIGN problem was water NOT LIQUID air being in there AND emergency use ONLY. THE superheated nitrogen plasma'ED even CAN COOL RADIANTLY AFTER FINAL TURBINE. MULTISTAGE TURBINES FISSION REHEATING OF WORKING NITROGEN BETWEEN EACH THAT DESIGN IS THIS MILLENIA'S ELECTRON PUSHER 🍑
@joshmckinney3254
4 жыл бұрын
I see the energy storage problem the same way I see the computer storage problem. You have to have a layered approach; you would never sell a computer with a CPU and no RAM or hard-drive storage would you? Of course not. Nor should we rely on L-ion batteries for our energy needs. You have to have multiple technologies all working on the same grid with varying levels of capacity and speed (or ramp-up time/discharge rate). I love the idea of liquid air energy storage for all the reason you mentioned: It has a very large capacity, scales well, and can be built just about anywhere. Couple it with a battery bank, a solar/wind farm, and maybe some other technologies and you've got the recipe for a seriously robust grid.
@AnthonyAllenJr
4 жыл бұрын
We'll said.
@sa13eh
4 жыл бұрын
Economically it is challenging
@markplott4820
4 жыл бұрын
JOSH - LION is too Valuable and Expensive for GRID Storage , which is WHY TESLA is going to LFP , IRON is a Cheap, Recyclable and Plentiful materiel. LFP batteries are Heavier , but Weight is a NON Issue in GRID storage.
@larryzavala7980
4 жыл бұрын
yes, excellent point. it all about optimization.
@larryzavala7980
4 жыл бұрын
i mean...excellent point Josh.
@GilmerJohn
4 жыл бұрын
One of the fun things is that your "liquid air" storage system has increased efficiency when you combine it with a conventional thermal plant.
@N0Xa880iUL
2 жыл бұрын
This is the way
@chrisnealis4270
4 жыл бұрын
I live in Madison County, Indiana. We currently have a large number of solar farms, with more on the way, and the northern half of the county is covered with wind generators. We’ve been good about jumping on new renewable energy sources and I really hope to see this in my community. The coal generators are dropping like flies, maybe someday we can ditch gas power as well.
@bocadelcieloplaya3852
4 жыл бұрын
How well does the solar work in winter? Isn't it cloudy a lot?
@chrisnealis4270
4 жыл бұрын
BocaDelCielo Playa It’s not much different from our summer months in recent years. Yay climate change... 😕
@bocadelcieloplaya3852
4 жыл бұрын
@@chrisnealis4270 , interesting. I live on the Gulf coast, so snow is a rarity. Always wondered though.
@bobwallace9753
4 жыл бұрын
@@bocadelcieloplaya3852 Often when overall solar output is lower wind output is higher. Each grid/region needs to determine the best mix for their weather conditions.
@bobwallace9753
4 жыл бұрын
@@bocadelcieloplaya3852 Solar rules when there's snow on the ground. Cool temperatures and reflected sunlight create the highest panel outputs.
@roberthigbee3260
4 жыл бұрын
Liquid air energy storage - great idea & great presentation (as usual, thanks). Regarding response time of this tech - why can't you also have a quick air battery system response by pairing lithium ion batteries with "air batteries"? How much lithium ion storage is needed? Answer - The size of the lithium ion battery to pair with an air battery is based on the time it takes for the air battery system to respond (how long for the air valves to open and for the gas turbine to spin up) combine this with the rate of energy you need to pump into the grid to compute the size of the lithium ion battery pack. So, I am guessing that it only would take a minute or so for the air battery to respond, so a relatively small lithium ion battery pack would fill this time gap. Once the air system is spun up, it can provide the main power and recharge the lithium ion pack. This is not a new concept. Electrical engineers have placed capacitors in electrical circuits since the dawn of circuit design to provide near instantaneous short term power to meet the millisecond to millisecond fluctuating power demands of, for example, a speaker amplifier circuit. In short, you can have your cake and eat it too, NBD.
@petertownsend252
4 жыл бұрын
Spot on.
@Real_MisterSir
4 жыл бұрын
I think that's another reason why they refer to lithium storage as a "sibling" more than a competitor. The whole idea is to have a minimum lithium base storage that can work within a moment's notice on sudden demand spikes, and then the liquid air storage can do the full day storage passively in the background. This combo minimizes the need for mass lithium systems, while still being able to respond quickly to urgent needs. The main trouble is if the sudden requirement for immediate power is too high for the lithium pack to handle, so the question is where is the desired balance point between the Lithium / liquid-air ratio.
@PeterGysegem
3 жыл бұрын
The final cost of the energy could probably be lowered by combining the system with the fractionating technology to strip out some of the more valuable products such as liquid oxygen and liquid argon. Because you would already have the liquefaction facility, one of the costlier parts of an overall separation plant you would be creating profitable side products at perhaps lower cost.
@PerroTrotavidas
2 жыл бұрын
Thats actually quite clever. I dont know the details myself but it does look like a fractionning sistem would be a relatively easy-cheap implementation into their system. Heck, at those scales you might even get a decent amount of helium from it.
@v44n7
Жыл бұрын
and why not bother to take the co2 out of the liquid air too? you can have all in one. Energy storage, oxygen/argon "production" and even a carbon dioxide capture. Everything on the same facility
@PeterGysegem
Жыл бұрын
@@v44n7 You are exactly correct. I focused on oxygen and argon as the most plentiful but there is no reason that I can see to limit it to those elements.
@rafaelribeiro9599
3 жыл бұрын
You can capture CO2 as well, since in this process we are already freezing the air.
@stevechance150
4 жыл бұрын
If I had a dollar for every time I've heard "this could change everything" regarding battery technology.
@Real_MisterSir
4 жыл бұрын
Then again, if you look back at the past 15 years, we've had countless breakthroughs and developments that have, literally, changed everything. Take your average phone today vs the ones available in 2005, just from a battery standpoint. The technology and production methods are continuously improving at a steady rate, at some points even exponential. It doesn't feel that incredible when you live with the technology and grow with it, but if you had a coma 15 years ago and woke up today you'd be bewildered by the improvements and new applications. Imagine that same experience in the coming 15 years. Sure, it might not be sci-fi levels of "change everything" as some people make it out to be, but it can very well be damn close to it.
@Tagurrit
3 жыл бұрын
@@Real_MisterSir tools are the best example. Phone batteries may be better but the phones use so much power that I don’t notice a huge difference, but tools! I’ve got a 48 volt lawnmower that will cut my whole yard on one charge. I’ve got a hammer drill that’s as capable as my corded one from 5 years ago.
@Real_MisterSir
3 жыл бұрын
@@Tagurrit That is true, but then again if you look at the phone as a tool - just think about how many tasks it manages to accomplish with that battery charge. You can be on 4g internet the whole day, browse social media, take high quality photos and video, stream music and videos.. Sure it doesn't feel like they have more charge, but they do accomplish a ton with what they have. Traditional phones would struggle to keep the music playing for a day. Meanwhile I can blast music for a full day and maybe loose 10-15% charge on my now old iPhone 6s. That's impressive.
@Tagurrit
3 жыл бұрын
@@Real_MisterSir You’re absolutely right. But I’m only talking about phone battery life not a phones overall use ability. I don’t even turn on my laptop any longer because I do so much on my phone. So as a tool the progress is amazing. But it’s like laptops. Twenty years ago I could turn on my 4 MB Ram 286 laptop and pull up word perfect from a DOS prompt or .bat menu in less than a minute. Today it takes two/three minutes. So object to object it’s slower but my 286 couldn’t do 1% of what my laptop today can do. So it depends on definitions.
@yaimavol
3 жыл бұрын
Every day it's a new announcement
@nicknackpattywackshow5011
4 жыл бұрын
Nikola Tesla created better energy device than this. too bad we keep thinking we're doing so much better, because of the restrictions from the Government.
@jada90
4 жыл бұрын
I'd never heard of this tech before! Loving the channel
@Name-kd5jj
4 жыл бұрын
The channel "Just have a think" posted a video about this months ago. Its a cool idea but i'm not sure its worth it. Solar and wind are going to struggle to meet power demands as is without having these losses in efficiency. Nuclear power is still the best option.
@UndecidedMF
4 жыл бұрын
As Javier pointed out, it's all about the money in the end. Utilities are following the path of cheapest per MWh price. Nuclear isn't the cheapest option out there ... but it's a good option depending on the situation.
@Name-kd5jj
4 жыл бұрын
@@UndecidedMF My argument is that solar isn't going to work anywhere outside of desert climates like California. If you look at places like Seattle they receive 1/6th the amount of sunlight in December vs July. This is an extreme example but its very common in northern regions to receive far less sunlight in winter than summer. So if you build enough solar panels to meet demand in summer than you will have a huge shortage in winter, and if you build enough to meet demand in winter you will have a huge surplus in summer. Also consider regions further north like Alaska which has even more extreme variations in sunlight, but also has to deal with extreme cold and snow. Another thing to consider is that solar requires 1000 times the land area of nuclear power which means that to meet demand you would have to cover such a vast amount of land it would be more destructive to the environment than it would be beneficial. Then there's the waste problem as well. This is especially problematic in areas that are both densely populated and mountainous like Japan. Japan doesn't have anywhere near enough flat land to install solar panels. Nuclear power works anywhere 24/7 365 days a year. Its constant, dispactable and very energy dense. Nuclear power is the future. I know renewables are "romantic" but its simply not feasible.
@slanahesh
4 жыл бұрын
@@Name-kd5jj you have targeted solar pretty specifically here to make a point, but you have ignored the fact that solar is not the only renewable energy source out there. There is on/off shore wind, geo thermal, tidal and good old fashioned hydro etc. My point is you choose the energy generation method that is most suitable for the location and if that is nuclear then thats fine but its not the be all end all of energy generation and pretending it is won't change that.
@Name-kd5jj
4 жыл бұрын
@@slanahesh Yes wherever renewables make sense i say go for it if its financially practical and doesn't disrupt the environment. Either way nuclear power will probably be present everywhere due to solar and wind's intermittency. Geothermal, tidal and hydro only work in certain areas but have the advantage of being more constant and reliable than solar and wind. So i say in desert areas go for solar because they're empty( no deforestation to install solar), sunny and usually sparsely populated. Japan may be able to use geothermal, tidal and wind, but given the extreme population density they will still have to rely on nuclear. I never said nuclear was the miracle fix for all energy, wherever we can install renewables to increase grid efficiency i say go for it. But renewables are not going to be the do-it-all solution either.
@aymanaltorra4631
3 жыл бұрын
I introduced a design for liquid air engine more than 25 years ago when I was a high school student.
@tomkeegan3782
3 жыл бұрын
Was the engine efficient, could it drive a car?
@tedbear631
3 жыл бұрын
I knew specialized batteries like this were possible but I've been having this thought in my head about the potential of cryogenic storage and this video helped me realize what I've been daydreaming about. So cool to see companies providing this as a clean air solution.
@johnnyb1843
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for showing this Matt. We have a plant that is being built in Manchester UK. Let's hope that the adoption of Cryo increases and can be integrated with other storage methods.
@prerunnerwannabe
4 жыл бұрын
To me this seems like the first grid scale option that will actually be viable. Sure, Li-ion is great, but it's expensive and battery cell production isn't large enough to provide the energy storage solutions that we need.
@electrichanoi7244
4 жыл бұрын
I watched a presentation they did, and doing the calculations for new york alone, they found that this tech would supply about 3/4 of all the energy storage requirements for a 100% renewable grid with batteries supplying the other fourth (including existing pumped hydro). that would still be tens of gigawatt hours of battery storage and 100s of gigawatthours of LAES. Both work together, batteries because they have better efficency and these because they cost much less to operate
@acmefixer1
4 жыл бұрын
@prerunnerwannabe Said, "... battery cell production isn't large enough..." The li-Ion cell production is being scaled up to be mass produced in the gigafactories that Tesla is building right now. The cell production lines are being optimized for maximum production at minimum costs. All of the cells Tesla makes will be used in their products but their Megapacks will be installed in utility scale battery storage projects and their Powerwalls will be installed in tens of thousands of homes. Tesla is calling their plants gigafactories but they will make more than just giga, they will be making tera quantities. Their gigafactory being built in Austin, TX sits on 2500 acres of land and they have plans to grow 50% per year, year on year. Tesla's solar and battery storage business will be bigger than the automobile business.
@prerunnerwannabe
4 жыл бұрын
@@acmefixer1 Yes, I'm aware of Tesla's ambitions, but expecting that lithium ion batteries will be the only solution for grid storage is just short sited. We need all viable forms of energy storage to be aggressively pursued if we actually want to transition to a renewable power mix.
@petertownsend252
4 жыл бұрын
Exactly. Liquid air has the best potential to scale quickly. It may take decades for Li-ion to scale to the production capacity liquid air might achieve in just a few years. Paired with new gigawatt scale solar PV coming in at less than $0.02 / kWh in favorable locations, a storage loss of 30% to 40% is economically viable. Curtailment of PV generated power only serves to bolster the economic case for liquid air storage. Even with a 50% storage efficiency loss, a rated $0.02 per kWh solar system now becomes a $0.04 per kWh system. That is an economic, "So What". $0.04 per kWh is great wholesale price for electricity that can be produced to meet demand 24/7. Of course, the operational cost and amortized design and install cost of the liquid air system has to be added to the $0.04 per kWh. Therein lies the rub in all this. Setting aside input energy, how much does it cost to design, build, and operate a liquid air storage system?
@rjhacker
4 жыл бұрын
This could condense water from the air as a byproduct even in the desert
@chrislook3395
4 жыл бұрын
Good point! There are other methods to produce water from air (eg salts, my air conditioner:-) ) but water would be a natural byproduct of this process as presumably one wouldn’t want water/ice to be stored.
@drewcipher896
4 жыл бұрын
Hot climates yes, but if it's a desert it wouldn't be effective.
@zaphodsbluecar9518
4 жыл бұрын
Like the vaporators on Tatooine... :-)
@ShmuelSpade
4 жыл бұрын
We can also use it to capture trace amounts of CO2
@psycronizer
4 жыл бұрын
@@drewcipher896 Exactly....there IS no water vapor in desert air to make any realistic quantity of water from...I don't get how people can be ,frankly so fucking stupid. Actually ThunderFoot did a piece on some idiotic pice of trash some company was trying to sell that used exactly that idea, extracting lots of drinkable water from air...total scam of course, but it was astounding just how many idiots lost their money and got suckered into it, it's actually really bad that people can be that stupid in this day and age...
@fr89k
4 жыл бұрын
From my gut feeling, the costs per MWh are probably too expensive, but we will see...
@nerdy1701
4 жыл бұрын
It may seem like a crazy idea but what if you paired these energy storage plants with traditional power plants. The storage could use the waste heat from burning natural gas/nuclear as the heat for the expansion of the gas. Then you would not need to invest in any heat storage bringing down costs considerably. Smaller versions might be worth it even with no renewables involved. They would allow them to construct smaller plants because you could size them by average usage and not by peak usage. Basically negating the need for traditional peaker plants anyway.
@sljzz441
3 жыл бұрын
60% to 70% efficiency, aka 30~40% loss, still sounds pretty damning for a utility scale storage process. Most batteries and gravity-based storage methods can reach 90% or above.
@enemyofthestatewearein7945
2 жыл бұрын
IMHO the efficiency of storage becomes much less important, when abundant cheap renewable sources are available to recharge it. It just needs to be able to deliver net-output cheaper than other medium-term on-demand sources like hydrogen combustion or pumped hydro. Batteries and pumped hydro are efficient but have relatively high capital cost. Liquid air technology looks competitive with other medium term on-demand sources and has relatively low capital costs.
@skeptibleiyam1093
2 жыл бұрын
I think they are talking about a situation where you have more solar/wind power being generated than you can use. It is going to be 100% lost if you don't have some kind of battery so the question is how much does it cost per kWh of surplus energy captured. Of course, if you have an overnight demand of X and your storage is 50% efficient, you will need to have generation capacity of 2X beyond the capacity that is used up during the day. That is, the more efficient your battery, the fewer surplus solar panels (for example) you need to charge the battery.
@inkooh8
3 жыл бұрын
So, this could also be a carbon capture technology when you liquefy the air and separate the CO2 out, though at an efficiency loss for energy storage.
@keyrtan
3 жыл бұрын
This has been my counter argument to people who like to argue that the production of lithium batteries negates the environmental benefit of going all electric. The technology has issues but we still need to advance beyond fossil fuels and innovations like this were bound to happen eventually.
@jnygaarddk
4 жыл бұрын
You say pumped Hydro storage is geo specific (since it needs elevation difference). Here is flat Denmark (highest hill is 170 meter high) we're working on sandstorage. Not thermal storage, but water in a big bladder tank, buried under 10s of meters of sand. The water pressure then lifts the sand, thus making it works like the water was pumped up high.
@carlosandleon
3 жыл бұрын
sounds like the bladder could break
@jmcampbell
4 жыл бұрын
Tesla alone is not the sole answer to sustainable clean energy. There are many other companies out there. Some people need to look and think outside of the box (the Tesla box). Some people just dismiss non-Tesla companies by calling them a scam and wishing them to fail. Having that kind of negative mindset and behaviour won't help us all to progress to clean, affordable and sustainable energy.
@MrVelociraptor75
4 жыл бұрын
And it's also against Tesla's overarching MO, "to accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy", so those so called "fans" are misguided as well Batteries will play a massive role in the transition period (my hope is, that will mainly be through household/commercial storage and V2G), but other technologies are necessary for the greater grid. In the end, it doesn't really matter WHO develops what, just that we get sustainable energy/storage
@rtfazeberdee3519
4 жыл бұрын
If I recall correctly, according to "Plug Life Television" there are no rare earth materials in a battery (if you check the periodic table)
@ss-mu2nr
4 жыл бұрын
Waooo I was working on this project from last 2 months and collecting the reserches on it (Disclaimar) Sorry to all that I am actually a medical student and I am not suposed to be on this type of engeniering projects according to rules but curiosity took me in it so dont mind plzzz, so i always thinks why this so simple project of renewable energy doesnot exist before and belive me there are hardly some reserches on this topic. So here is my point this french fella which is telling about there work. They have basically 2 flaws in this project in my opinion and my little bit research. 1. The compressing of the air to liquified it takes energy which is very tough and costly beacuse the sense in this project is that we are working on renewable energy 2. Reserve the heat and again apply it on cold/liquified air to make a pressure also a very difficult and energy cunsomption job and heat loss may also another factor during heat storage. Like I said these are 2 main flwas in my opinion may be there could be more but they could be easily successable and I got the solution in recent 5 days thankfully this social media. In my opinion we have to mix two or may three different methods to acheive our goals. Flaws which i assumes i got the solution is 1. We have to addminister solar energy in this project (WHY)? Beacause use of solar my give us almost free cost in storing the air There I mean air not in the compressed liquified form or it may could be compressed but till at that point that it could not change its state into liquid. 2. We dont have to store the heat infact use of heat remains not essential, we have to use gravitational force to release the air from storing capsule. Here is my case I hope you ll understand and sorry for my english beacuse its not my mother language. Love and best of luck from Pakistan.
@Dionyzos
4 жыл бұрын
Do a video on gravity storage! I wrote a paper on it in university and it’s crazy interesting.
@UndecidedMF
4 жыл бұрын
It is pretty cool! I've been keeping an eye on companies like Gravitricity. It's another "why aren't we doing this already" technology.
@zaphodsbluecar9518
4 жыл бұрын
@@rogerstarkey5390 Not enough room inside - gravity storage systems are much larger, plus if you did build one inside you'd have major access issues for maintenance, and when you decommissioned the wind turbine, you'd have to decommission the gravity-storage unit. Best kept separate.
@volodumurkalunyak4651
4 жыл бұрын
Hydropower and pumped hydropower are the best from gravitational power storage class. Outher types - non existent on commertial scale
@fotoguru222
4 жыл бұрын
@@volodumurkalunyak4651 Yes, unfortunately most of the best locations for pumped hydro storage have already been developed. You can put the solid stuff anywhere land is cheap.
@TechsScience
4 жыл бұрын
You put lots of energy to liquefy the Air to run the generator to produce the energy Is it even a good idea?
@lotoa3383
4 жыл бұрын
Right, like with Li-ion batteries, you put lots of energy to charge the batteries to produce energy, is it even a good idea?
@Ledsrule1
4 жыл бұрын
50 mgs really when the governor of California calls for a total swing to electric by 2030 ummmmm not happening
@MAl-xz7lc
4 жыл бұрын
HOW ABOUT 🤔... Cars have MAGNETIC sides.. AND THE highway, S HAVE copper coils next TO.these roads.. . LETS FOR A VIEW miles.. THE AMOUNT OF ENERGY WILL BE MINDBLOWING..... 🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽GR KARMA.
@krishnachandranM
4 жыл бұрын
It is a very good idea. As indicated in the video, there will be ways to improve the efficiency by adding more complex structures at risk of facility cost.
@pathfollower
4 жыл бұрын
The tech sounds promising. I like it, but... you aren't just throwing away 40% of your energy, you are throwing away 40% of the life cycle of your wind turbine. Seems extreme. Are we calculating that into the math? Seems less of an issue for solar. When he was comparing his tech to the big boy on the block, pumped hydro, he claimed pumped hydro was 50%-70% efficient. A quick google search brought up that pumped hydro is commonly >%80 efficient. The example you gave(Bath County) was near that at 79%. I don't know, but an apparent discrepancy.
@yamitvargas8065
4 жыл бұрын
Matt great video. I may say to your question of why we are not using that technology, maybe we need more people like you who chares tis information in a way that is easy to understand and so obvious that one must need to say as well -" we need to transition right now". Thank you for great contribution to the whole community.
@UndecidedMF
4 жыл бұрын
Appreciate that thought.
@visualcontrast
2 жыл бұрын
Matt, you're only 83 days from 1M subs! I've been watching your videos for the last 3 weeks and based on your growth rate I've noticed, you'll hit 1M subs around August 2022 this year. Great work!
@jehiahmaduro6827
4 жыл бұрын
Its a cool tech that has been around for a long while but never had a reason energy storage application because of the pervasiveness of the oil and fossil fuels. Now with the awareness of climate change and vast intermittent renewable energy sources this tech can finally come to fruition.
@markplott4820
4 жыл бұрын
MEGAPACK is a Superior product and can store 3mw each.
@W020-j9o
4 жыл бұрын
You do an excellent job of explaining technology to a wide audience--something that becomes more critically important with each new "indistinguishable from magic" technology. Keep up the good work!
@UndecidedMF
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks, Dan!
@rum102larkommod7
3 жыл бұрын
You are often confusing power and energy. I hear you say “megawatt” for energy storage. That’s like saying the grocery store is “5 mph” away, when you mean “5 miles” away. I know this is driving many of your viewers crazy and lots of people comment on it. To further beat a dead horse, power is an instantaneous measure of energy flow. A kW can’t do any work; it’s not a unit of energy. Just like 60mph won’t get you anywhere unless you travel at that speed for a millisecond, an hour or a week. Then you’ll have travelled some fraction of a mile. Or multiple (or thousands) of miles. That’s analogous to energy.
@GeorgeKaravatsos
4 жыл бұрын
So could this work as a baseload "power plant"? Like an intermediate between renewables and the grid?
@bobwallace9753
4 жыл бұрын
Baseload is a term we need to abandon. It really refers to how steam plants operate. Steam plants are slow to bring online and don't load follow very well so past practice has been to keep them running just under their rated capacity. That's the baseload power supply. "Baseload" just shouldn't be used when talking about demand. There is an absolute minimum demand over any period of time. That tells the system designer how much electricity they will need at all times. Then, above that minimum, demand rises and falls. Talk about 'minimum demand' rather than using a term that applies to the generation side. Large scale storage like liquid air can time-shift energy from when there's an oversupply for demand to when there's an undersupply. Liquid air, batteries, compressed air, and pump-up hydro are all technologies that can time-shift energy. In a 100% renewable system there will be few 'always on'/baseload generators. Run of the river hydro and geothermal will generally run 24/365 but they will be small contributors. Hydro will generally be a dispatchable generator. Biomass/fuel may become either 'always on' or dispatchable. The main electricity generators will be wind and solar and they are 'use when available, store for when they aren't' sources.
@wendyprabhu
4 жыл бұрын
Look at it like "pumped hydro in a box". Like pumped hydro, liquid air energy storage delivers clean energy storage with grid synchronous inertia to enable baseload renewable energy
@bobwallace9753
4 жыл бұрын
@@wendyprabhu Good comment, but could we drop the term "baseload" when talking about renewable energy? Baseload refers to generation, mainly coal and nuclear plants. Things that are generally 'always on'. What storage helps provide is "an ample supply of electricity to meet demand when it occurs". A matching of supply and demand.
@petertownsend252
4 жыл бұрын
And therein lies the rub in all this. The electric utility industry (and its economically aligned fossil business affiliates) would much prefer to see liquid air storage technology killed in the crib rather than see its existing baseload fossil/nuclear plants have to begin competing for off peak market share and/or ratchet down production to match reduced demand during off peak. Liquid air storage will allow low cost gigawatt scale solar and wind to outflank the utilities on curtailment and thereby provide an economic path for continued growth and expansion of utility scale solar and wind. As a legitimate full service 24/7 power producer on equal footing, they will have the ability to store excess power generated during the day and dump it back into the grid 24/7 including off peak times when demand is low. Possession being nine-tenths of the law, it my guess the electric utility industry will go to the mattresses to try and prevent liquid air storage from gaining any type of physical access to the grid. They can easily deny property access, easements, and permits that may be necessary to hook into the grid. It may take a very long hard regulatory and legal fight for liquid air storage to gain physical access to the grid.
@bobwallace9753
4 жыл бұрын
@@petertownsend252 Feels like you have an image of "the big, bad utility industry" in your head as if there is one organism. In fact, there are many utility companies operating across the country. Some of them own their 'means of production', some buy electricity from suppliers. Most are under some pressure to lower their carbon footprint. Nuclear is dead. Most US reactors are approaching the end of their usable lives and, essentially, no replacements are being constructed. Nuclear is simply priced out of most markets. We have reactors that are paid off, in decent working condition, and have years left on their license but are being closed. The market won't pay the $0.04+/kWh they need to cover expenses and avoid bankruptcy. A handful of reactors are running in the red but being kept online with subsidies. I think they are being subsidized as a means of protecting jobs and the businesses that need those workers money. Coal is dead. The only coal plants that can compete are a handful that are located so close to where the coal is extracted that they have very small fuel shipping costs. And those coal plants are in some areas with very good wind resources. We're closing coal plants and I don't think we've started construction on a new one since George W. was in office. Liquid air storage (I'm assuming it works and is affordable) won't outflank the utilities. The utilities will either build the facilities or purchase electricity from them if someone else is the owner. I can see utilities fighting liquid air storage only if the utility owns fossil fuel or nuclear plants that they are trying to keep in operation. And since utilities don't get to set their own rates, we'll see the governance boards disapproving continued operation of expensive generation if there are lower cost options available. There are some utilities that have been required to open up their grid for any qualifying supplier to sell electricity to consumers. They use the utility's grid and pay a use fee. In those service areas the utility company, the grid owner, is going to leap at liquid air storage if it lets them be more competitive with other suppliers competing for customers.
@paparaiski
3 жыл бұрын
Meh its sounds promising but when you factor the energy needed to cool oxygen to its liquid state im starting to doubt its efficiency.
@bvegas
3 жыл бұрын
The atmosphere is 71% nitrogen
@adam-g7crq
4 жыл бұрын
I've been aware of liquid air batteries for a while, and I find them an exciting option for a very affordable mass grid storage using of the shelf technology that's available now, I wonder if we could build more storage than we need, the option is here with this system
@markplott4820
4 жыл бұрын
liquid air batteries are BS, compared to current Tesla MAGAPACK batteries (3mw each) , they will get Cheaper when TESLA changes them to 4680 LFP - iron batteries.
@vw254
4 жыл бұрын
@@markplott4820 Nobody has seen neither the size nor the exact data of the 4680 batteries ... The presentation video was pathetic
@markplott4820
4 жыл бұрын
@@vw254 - EVERYTHING was laied out CLEAR as DAY , if Battery OEM's dont increase Production , TESLA will make 4680 battery in HIGH Nickel, LFP , and NCA/NCM Chemestry. ELIMINATING the need for Comodity Cells. CATL, Panasonic, LG Chem will LOOSE their BIGGEST Customer. Because, can do it THEMSELVES.
@Real_MisterSir
4 жыл бұрын
@@vw254 Are you referring to the size of a total battery pack, or the size of individual battery cells? If you refer to the latter, the size of 4680 cells, then that is literally their size: 46mm x 80mm. If you know the amount of cells per battery pack, you can easily figure out the total size.
@MnrBugi
3 жыл бұрын
@@markplott4820 different use cases! Although I would indeed put my money on redux flow as an intermittent storage. This efficiency is just painful. Seasonal is only possible through phase change or hydrogen, optionally converter to methane, in my opinion.
@QarbitraryQ
3 жыл бұрын
Javier "you can have as high an efficiency as you want" … As high efficiency as I want eh? I want 100%. … Javier "No."
@lordkyzer2
4 жыл бұрын
if this system cleans the air before freezing it, does it remove carbon from the air?
@CorwynGC
4 жыл бұрын
Cleaning is for particles large in comparison to air molecules, so large particles of Carbon, yes. Carbon dioxide is roughly the same size a Oxygen and Nitrogen molecules. Cleaning won't sort them.
@davidmay268
4 жыл бұрын
As the process is already used to extract nitrogen and oxygen from the air, I think it could be used for carbon capture. The question is whether it would be simpler and more cost effective to have a separate plant for that.
@CorwynGC
4 жыл бұрын
@@davidmay268 You can sort the molecules by their condensation or freezing temperature, but that wouldn't be 'cleaning' it. Given that they have a use for both the heat and the coolth, doing it in concert sounds like a good idea. There may well be some engineering that I don't understand that would rule it out.
@UndecidedMF
4 жыл бұрын
They don't isolate the different components of the air, but they could. This type of system could also act as carbon capture system ... it all depends on how they configure/build it out.
@davidmay268
4 жыл бұрын
@@UndecidedMF sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant the process is used elsewhere to separate gases, you're right it's not done in this plant.
@beebob1279
3 жыл бұрын
Storing energy for home use. There is a guy in New Jersey who put together a solar system that when there was access power produced, it made hydrogen. Yes, hydrogen. It was stored in a low pressure tank (propane tank) and oxygen from the process was stored in another tank. When the house needs electricity the hydrogen produces it for him. It's in his backyard. It took a while from what I understand to get township approval but it works
@mikeselectricstuff
4 жыл бұрын
Thereare no rare earth metals in lithium ion batteries
@409raul
4 жыл бұрын
Yep, Lithium is almost everywhere on the earth's crust. Mr E said so himself on Battery day.
@tomkelly8827
4 жыл бұрын
Cobalt is not a rare earth metal but it is a metal that is rare on this earth. it is in lithium batteries
@La-Illaha-Illa-Allah
4 жыл бұрын
@@tomkelly8827 it is hard to mine it ethically
@drewcipher896
4 жыл бұрын
@@tomkelly8827 Some* lithium ion batteries. Cobalt free batteries are becoming more common.
@JRP3
4 жыл бұрын
@@tomkelly8827 Cobalt is actually not that rare, it's ranked 32nd in global abundance.
@marcuswillbrandt5901
3 жыл бұрын
Sadly this technology gets much less attention than it deserves. The german company "Linde" is in the business of liquefaction for over a century, but when german politicians talk about energy storage you always hear battery or hydrogen
@Muppetkeeper
4 жыл бұрын
Efficiency is only an factor once we have enough storage to stop "throwing away" the power we are already able to generate. In the UK we need to build these big and build them fast, the renewables are growing quickly. We also had a problem where our gas tubine power stations had to "derate" for a few days, as the air temperature was so warm, the efficiency of their cooling was lowered, so we were burning coal!! If one of these stations was nearby, the gas company could have used their excess heat to warm the liquid air, which would have improved the efficiency of both systems!
@ricknoyb1613
3 жыл бұрын
Seems very inefficient. I'm thinking using the liquid air directly in large structures for cooling and using the compression cycle to heat large buildings as being much more efficient by eliminating the losses due to conversion (air flow to create electricity). Distilling the other gases, argon and neon for commercial resale, and carbon dioxide for sequestering or other commercial uses (closed greenhouse or algae enhancement) would help offset the cost of lower efficiencies.
@soreloser6018
4 жыл бұрын
%60 efficiency of wind and solar that are %30 efficient. Requiring 1.4 times as many solar panels and wind mills. Or we could make a few nuclear plants and call it a day.
@waynebrehaut7183
3 жыл бұрын
Call it a day after spending a decade or more building the nuclear plants. Then major upgrading or repair a decade later.
@WanderingDad
4 жыл бұрын
I feel like, as the price of solar plummets, the efficiency of storage becomes less important. Eventually not a factor at all, electricity looks to become that cheap. Now that we live here, the future is awesome.
@Xcelential
4 жыл бұрын
If we rely on solar for a large percentage of energy, what will provide power at night? You need to store some of the electricity generated during the day. Thus, you need batteries to back up solar energy sources.
@zacharypernikliyski4830
4 жыл бұрын
This is such a brilliant idea, the first time I heard it on “now you know “ I’ve been trying to spread the word about it, this technology combined with Tesla battery Can be super affective balancing the electrical grid,, if this company developers /Build their technology in California they can run it themselves and get regular people to invest in it, this is a better way forward instead of trying to sell it to somebody else and that person gets the profit from it, this is the question of financial engineering/innovation not Technology,
@robertlackey7212
4 жыл бұрын
All these new ideas have people making pretty looking graphs and charts to try to sell them , but until you get 15 or 20 plants running a couple decades your really not going to know for sure . It's silly to say " what's the cheapest , lets go with that one" when was the last time that the cheapest anything , turned out to be the best choice ?? We should just make 15 or 20 of these plants , all in different local situations and see how things shakeout .
@kevinmccune682
4 жыл бұрын
The Nimbys will be screeching about the compressor noises and the explosive power of the warmed up gases( trust me someone will not like it)
@robertlackey7212
4 жыл бұрын
@@kevinmccune682 I would normally say "ignore them" , but I know just how crazy being unable to sleep can make you , we had a guy here pull a gun on a pastor that was having all night "ocultas" and was screaming all night with a hand held megaphone about the sin of sex. The police took him away , but I felt for the man. So ya , F**K with people all day in the name of progress , if they want peace and quiet they can live out in the woods , but prevent them from sleeping and you are playing with fire !
@dlwatib
4 жыл бұрын
The title is pure clickbait. "Liquid Air Battery Explained - The End of Lithium Ion Batteries?" There's no danger whatsoever of liquid air ending the dominance of lithium ion batteries. In fact, it's misleading to even call liquid air energy storage a battery; it most certainly is not. Thumbs down for the trash title. Any efficiency is predicated on being able to make use of the waste heat and cooling. That makes it a much less portable solution than you've implied. It's got to be colocated with uses for that heat and cooling capacity. By the way, it's also got to compete with its sister technology, compressed-air energy storage (CAES). I've no idea which would win out on any given project, but my guess would be CAES since it's generating less unwanted heat and cooling. Also it can take advantage of existing cavities such as spent salt mines for air storage.
@UndecidedMF
4 жыл бұрын
I’ve actually changed the title after feedback like yours. I didn’t think it was that clickbaity, but clearly missed the mark. The actual term for this technology is cryogenic energy storage, but it’s better known as liquid air battery ... hence the title.
@factnotfiction5915
3 жыл бұрын
It isn't quite that bad. I agree "Liquid Air Storage ...." would be better, but not a major faux pas. The advantage it has over CAES is exactly its colocation ability and its lack of need for old mines, etc. In cities, where the demand is - and demand for district heat and district cooling - and the non-flammability aspect (compared to a hydrogen plant inside a city) - and its constructability make it ideal. It really pairs well with a Gen IV nuclear plant (nuclear providing waste heat for expansion, liquid air providing load following), and both siteable inside a city.
@igorahern
3 жыл бұрын
Matt, you should do a follow-up video in this topic if the facilitys are in operation already! I'm very curious!! Thank you
@denniss3980
4 жыл бұрын
I am from Iowa, they have lots of windmills there but I sware, every time I visit my home state 80% of the windmills are sitting idle
@UndecidedMF
4 жыл бұрын
Then you're seeing curtailment. Definitely need energy storage to keep those turbines turning.
@AnalystPrime
4 жыл бұрын
@@UndecidedMF This fact needs to be spread in more media. Few things are as annoying as smug morons going "I saw a windmill once but it wasn't turning" as "proof" that wind doesn't exist or all windmills are always broken, or whatever they are claiming this week. Also, USA in general needs to stop ignoring the need to repair and upgrade basic infrastructure, including the electric grid that could transmit the energy form those windmills to another state if nobody in Iowa needs it right now.
@factnotfiction5915
3 жыл бұрын
@@UndecidedMF curtailment? - Onshore wind turbines in the US (i.e. Iowa) have a ~35% capacity factor. So around 65% of the time they may indeed be idle. Note: turbines usually turn about 70% of the time, but turbines in a single farm (well actually a single state considering the size of weather patterns) are correlated because the weather pattern across them is the same, so they all tend to be spinning or not spinning. "Definitely need energy storage to keep those turbines turning" - sigh! Wind turns wind turbines. Are you going to tell us next that electricity generation drives the demand load? We definitely need energy storage, but that is to provide a more stable grid, not to keep wind turbines spinning.
@factnotfiction5915
3 жыл бұрын
@@AnalystPrime However, the "I saw a windmill once but it wasn't turning" observation is proof of: A: intermittent energy having difficulty integrating to the grid (either it isn't contributing power, or it is curtailed - in either case due to its intermittency). B: a low return on assets (an idle asset necessarily leads to a low return)
@yaimavol
3 жыл бұрын
You are correct. Wind turbines are very high maintenance. Instead of listening to the posters below, you should talk to someone who actually works on them. They are totally incapable of replacing coal and nat gas. Nat gas is the cleanest, most efficient fuel we are using to generate electricity and we have hundreds of years of it. It's also the most effective way to heat your home in winter ever invented. The people pushing the climate change hoax do not care about this planet or it's people. There is a much darker agenda in play
@twostepz4982
3 жыл бұрын
I am all supportive for this idea. Lithium ion batteries aren’t recyclable after a number of years being used to store the power. So, the only point is weather they keep focusing on this liquid battery air or make lithium ion recyclable thus cheaper energy for air and solar power.
@pilcrow1546
4 жыл бұрын
Sometimes the best solution to a problem is the simplest.
@UndecidedMF
4 жыл бұрын
Couldn't agree more.
@joshuasmith7369
4 жыл бұрын
2 statements I've learned are 1: kiss= keep it simple stupid. 2: if it's stupid, but works, it isn't stupid. I learned about those two statements during my time in the U.S. Army.
@lemonskunnk
4 жыл бұрын
occam's razor prevails again!
@tonystanley5337
4 жыл бұрын
If batteries and solar are economic on a small scale they are economic on a large scale. People just can't get their heads around the amount and cost of batteries, and noone has made these numbers before. That is changing now. If you can build these inefficient plants and get a profit before large volumes of lithium ion is available you could payback the investment and make a profit, but once lithium is in high volume the low efficiency cannot compete with them.
@markstevenson4030
4 жыл бұрын
Only me who read: Lucid Air Energy? I had a heart attack
@JanneWolterbeek
4 жыл бұрын
lol
@CNile-se9xw
4 жыл бұрын
@@JanneWolterbeek You a Warren Redlich subscriber? 'Cmon, I know you are.
@93matarl
4 жыл бұрын
to be honest, there is to many 3d animations and no real working machines, and as @thunderf00t says a scam always has too many 3d animations and no real prof(or a real prof of concept with the addition of false information). sorry but I'm skeptical about the claims that this is a good solution.
@alexmckenna1171
4 жыл бұрын
We need to start building these now, assuming there is a standard model for "mass production" of the equipment, etc. Having a wise and thoughtful government would be a help!
@bobwallace9753
4 жыл бұрын
First we need a really solid proof of concept. We need one or a few of these plants operating for enough time to make sure there are no issues left to be solved and that they are affordable. We're not in a hurry for storage on hardy any grid. Other than some tiny island grids I know of none that have installed enough wind and solar that there's a big need for storage.
@tommyp1124
4 жыл бұрын
Me after youtube videos. We need fusion reactors everywhere.
@bobwallace9753
4 жыл бұрын
@@tommyp1124 We've got a huge, highly reliable fusion reactor that's paid off and giving us free energy. We don't need any more. -- If someday someone figures out how to make affordable electricity using fusion then let's discuss it. For now we don't know how to control fusion and we have no route for making its electricity affordable.
@tomkohman4620
4 жыл бұрын
Perhaps someday big solar and wind will have the resources to compete with big oil in the race to buy government favor.
@markplott4820
4 жыл бұрын
Alex, Tesla MEGAPACK is Already PROFITABLE and EZ to Deploy , only 1 month from Delivery to GRID use. TESLA built Hornsdale in 100 days !!!!!!! using Powerpacks.
@blah5617
3 жыл бұрын
“When you see a wind turbine not turning that’s why” or.. ya know... the wind isn’t blowing 😂
@tedtedness184
3 жыл бұрын
Or it is broken, as many do.
@hasturbr
4 жыл бұрын
This idea could work if the compressor is operated directly by the wind turbine. Avoiding two energy conversions.
@beback_
4 жыл бұрын
Interesting idea, must see if the added mechanical complexity is worth it.
@AndreSomers
4 жыл бұрын
Not really, as you want to have a single plant like this do a whole wind or solar park. Putting it in the turbine itself will just require lots of additional piping, heavier turbines that are more expensive to build and lower efficiency due to not being able to store and reuse the heat and cold generated in the process (as efficiently). So no, you don’t want this on the turbines themselves.
@G11713
4 жыл бұрын
Electric generators are more efficient than mechanical linkages what with location sensitivity, mechanical maintenance, and all that greasing. A couple lengths of wire and an ac/dc converter can cheaply send that wind turbine product great distances.
@hasturbr
4 жыл бұрын
@@AndreSomers This does not make sense. Every energy conversion have huge losses. You need the turbine to convert wind kinectic force into rotation force that pushes the generator to produce electricity then convert the electricity back into rotation again in other place to compress the gas. It have to be better to conect the compressor to the turbine and just compress the gas.
@AndreSomers
4 жыл бұрын
@@hasturbr Seems that you're just going to ignore every argument you've been given. Think about this: if your idea that every energy conversion has huge losses was true, then why would trains that run on non-electrified tracks employ a diesel-electric power train? That is: they use diesel to drive a generator that creates electrical power, which is then used to drive electric motors that drive the axles.
@domalash
4 жыл бұрын
It might not power smart phones but I can imagine it powering cars and passenger drones. I can imagine vehicles with insulated fuel cell containers that can hold frozen liquid air tanks. One of the biggest issues is the time to refuel a vehicle and this might totally solve that problem. I can imagine different size vehicles using 1, 3, 6 or 9 x 20L or 40L tanks of liquid fuel. I can also imagine them being quickly injected into a vehicle at your local fuel station and the old tanks being recycled. There's a really good youtube video about from a professor explaining how compressed air has been around for a long time and that patents where bought by fuel companies. Point is I knew compressed air was an option but now that I understand we can freeze the liquid and reduce the pressure vessel requirements, like omg, that's sick. I should register the domain name powerpopsicles.com! Oh and combine this tech with the thermos insolation tech, bingo! Vacuum insulated fuel cell chambers! Think about it.
@domalash
4 жыл бұрын
Imagine a container of frozen pellets that can be moved from vacuum insulated storage tank to a small high pressure chambers. Maybe have 4 or 6 pressure chambers to compensate for decompression timing difference from fresh to old pellet. Or a check valve that passes gas to a second high pressure storage container that powers an air piston engine. And of course, heat exchangers and Peltier thermoelectric plates to extract electricity from temperature differences.
@FreeCanadian76
4 жыл бұрын
That's really cool! (pun intended) LOL
@Anton-cv2ti
4 жыл бұрын
If it speeds up the transition to green energy, I'll take it.
@theRhinsRanger
3 жыл бұрын
Proud of Scotland, for a wee country we always try to stay at the fore front of innovation
@varunm7011
4 жыл бұрын
The thumbnail shows a battery with air in it, tile says some thing similar , but Matt with smug laugh: you are not gonna have liquid air battery. (9:25) Me : why the _ did i click this
@Budha75
4 жыл бұрын
Clickbait title. I would have downvoted if it wasn't for the great video.
@stevetobin7495
4 жыл бұрын
Yep..i read battery and clicked
@thefance4708
4 жыл бұрын
It's a battery alright. It's just intended for the grid, rather than consumer devices.
@varunm7011
4 жыл бұрын
@@thefance4708 you are right , i didn't disagree. I am trying to make a different point
@Nphen
4 жыл бұрын
Everyone who knows what a liquid-air battery is clicked on this to find out more about this grid storage device. Like me. Agree that the title is clickbait though. The CEO himself says he is not competing with Li-ion. A lot of the commenters are missing that point as well. Some people are turning this into a "Tesla vs Highview" but they're targeting different market segments.
@thesproat
4 жыл бұрын
Love to see the cost of maintaining a cryogenic facility like that vs lithium power storage. Something tells me cryogenic systems have more failure paths than lithium cells!!??
@Hunter-lm7wo
3 жыл бұрын
But batteries lose charge capacity with every charge cycle so they will have to be replaced while yes maintenance cost will be higher but the plant could run for 40 years before needing to replace major parts
@thesproat
3 жыл бұрын
@@Hunter-lm7wo depends what chemistry of cells you're using and how the BMS controls their charge cycle. What you're possibly forgetting is that these battery banks will be continuously monitored and topped up with charge either by the grid or renewables so will only be in a condition to lose capacity when being drained. They won't be sat "idle" even if unsupervised directly by a human on site. An ebike battery loses about 10% storage capacity after around 1000 complete charge cycles but is still able to function. A tesla car battery has, I believe, a life span of 100,000 miles plus under warranty but will still work beyond that even at a reduced total storage capacity compared to new. An Ebike battery is about 0.5kwh, tesla car battery is between 55 - 80kwh capacity and we're talking about potentially mega watt hour capacity. Even if one "pack/module" breaks down the rest will still function. Lithium banks have no moving parts, no hostile chemicals and no extreme operating requirements. With cryogenic systems one "O" ring could cause the whole thing to stop working and given how hostile cryogenic system are to materials I'd still be backing lithium any day of the week. It already works and has proven to work. Tesla has already delivered in Australia and it works better than any other back up system they've tried, as far as I'm aware. I'm not saying this liquid air malarkey doesn't technically work, but Holy hell it's going to be a darn site more difficult to maintain. I would love to see both of them in an earth quake situation to see which one holds up better!!??
@briankgarland
4 жыл бұрын
Or we just built nuke plants and avoid this sillyness.
@bilgyno1
4 жыл бұрын
I'm not against nuclear power, but no-one wants to build them. They cost too much, and recent projets in the West are all examples of extreme cost and time overrun. Biggest problem, is time to deployment. We can't wait another 15-20 years before new reactors come online in massive numbers to start reducing carbon emissions. And that would require political decisions being made today to build hundreds of nuclear power plants immediately. It's simply not happening fast enough and at sufficient scale.
@factnotfiction5915
3 жыл бұрын
@@bilgyno1 "but no-one wants to build them" - except UAE, Bangladesh, India, Ghana, PRC, Finland, Ukraine, Lithuania ...
@BlownF150
3 жыл бұрын
Matt Ferrell, and most of his subscribers, could really use a few classes in thermodynamics. "Capturing waste heat and cold...", I think that statement kills braincells simply by hearing it.
@chadwells7562
2 жыл бұрын
🤣
@AgentSmith911
4 жыл бұрын
meh, too expensive
@ilovefunnyamv2nd
3 жыл бұрын
Ok, so before watching the video, I have a few issues. Liquid Air? either this was a poorly made name, or they're doing something dangerous. What Temperature / pressure is needed to condense something that is normally a gas into it's liquid state, are they separating the elements? After watching, awesome, the fact that they capture most of the thermal energy back makes this efficient but also viable. This has the potential to change the world. As an engineer though, thats a lot of moving parts that need to be maintained
@jean-pierredevent970
3 жыл бұрын
Ideally, the two exchange processes must go on almost lossless and fast, followed by again almost lossless storage of the heat or cold. This seems so expensive that I fear only a low efficiency will be obtained (perhaps at best 50%) If there is a lot of hot waste energy nearby then they could use that to decompress the liquid very fast. Then the saved money from the heat storage could be used to improve the storage and exchange of the cold streams. Under such conditions I believe it could work. I am no engineer but after the algae desillusion, they won't fool me again in believing ;-)
@gasser5001
4 жыл бұрын
Nope. They're wasting their time and money on this.
@TCt83067695
3 жыл бұрын
Please elaborate
@kevin_6217
3 жыл бұрын
Oh great, compressed air energy storage had problems with getting too cold when it was discharged. Liquid air is going to be WAY worse. Where do you plan on getting the energy to boil your liquid air again? You are going to need a vaporizer and a heating system to extract the energy efficiently. This is such a rediculous idea.
@jean-pierredevent970
3 жыл бұрын
These standing bottles do not all contain the liquid nitrogen but even more the stored heat and cold in ... I think "gravel". But I am also puzzled about that aspect. I guess they will not tell much about it since the Chinese are never far away.
@Riddhi42069
4 жыл бұрын
For 1GWH storage _ 25% eff is too low _
@NickDDDD
3 жыл бұрын
Thanks for all your work Matt really educational. I am in the UK. Question for you/everyone - I've tried to do some research re LABs & HighView but I cannot find out 1. The cost (pence/KwH) of the stored energy they will supply/output, I am guessing 40% higher than the renewable energy input, as the entire process is reportedly 60% efficient -correct? 2. How quickly it will be scaled up & to what scale? 3. What is the cost improvement on these scale ups on output electricity price? 4. What is the cost of the basic 5MW plant installation? There don't seem to be any figures. Thanks all.
@sidkemp4672
4 жыл бұрын
Excellent video on an important technology that I hadn't heard about before. I have one question, and one suggestion for a follow-on video. The question is whether the therm "battery" is accurate for this type of energy storage. The follow-on video would be about the environmental impact of these cryogenic air systems. With no chemicals being created or destroyed, it would seem to be very eco-friendly and a good resource to reduce global climate change. But is this true? Are there hidden environment dangers, risks, or costs?
@409raul
4 жыл бұрын
The title is a bit misleading isn't it? Perhaps it could've been - Liquid Air Batteries: The Rival to Li Ion Batteries.
@eugeniustheodidactus8890
4 жыл бұрын
Yes.... i thought that 2170 cells would have Liquid Air inside of them! Lol.
@UndecidedMF
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the title suggestion ... just changed it.
@thomaskerkhoff579
4 жыл бұрын
Major hinderance: Lack of national policy supporting a coordinated/integrated mix of renewable energy generation and storage via a 'smart' national grid
@rayrocher6887
2 жыл бұрын
thanks for Helping the Energy conservation World.
@Nevir202
4 жыл бұрын
Now that he’s said that you can’t power your phone with it, I really wanna see a phone charger powered by liquified gas lol.
Пікірлер: 1,5 М.