Lake Hodges Pumped Storage Power Generation Goes Online

[DaveinOlyWA]

The process also allows for carbon dioxide to be captured before the fuel is burned.

That does not make any sense...
CO2 is a direct product of burning the fuel, how can you capture it before???

injecting air into the processing of Steel is retains a greater portion of the carbon right? is that not sequestration on a small scale?

 

[Smidge204]

injecting air into the processing of Steel is retains a greater portion of the carbon right? is that not sequestration on a small scale?

No? You pump air into smelting iron to REMOVE carbon by oxidizing it. The carbon dioxide then gasses off (and other impurities oxidize and form a slag) leaving relatively pure iron behind. You can then re-add a controlled amount of carbon to adjust the properties of the finished metal.

I think either someone just misspoke and they really meant CO2 is captured after combustion, or there is CO2 resulting from the gassification process that they remove before combustion - which is the only way I can see it making sense. If there's a lot of CO2 in the syngas then there is room for improvement!

But the real mystery is why there's a discussion about coal power plants in a topic about pumped storage? :|
=Smidge=

 

[planet4ever]

its a HUGE waste of energy but without V2G, massive power storage options etc, 100% of it will be lost. this might only have a 10-15% return but its better than zero

I'm not a big fan of pumped storage since it consumes 20% of the electricity going into the storage system

Is pumped storage as good as 50% efficient?

Wow, those numbers are all over the place. I would have guessed 80% efficient, which is what I think Nekota is saying, but does anyone have hard numbers? Nekota, you gave specific numbers for the Castaic improvement project, so you might know where to find overall efficiency numbers there. Dave, your number seems way low, and unless you have data to back it up I might be tempted to call it FUD.

Ray

 

[Nekota]

For the efficiency of energy storage systems overview :

http://www.electricitystorage.org/images/uploads/static_content/technology/technology_resources/life-efficiency_large.gif" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The actual efficiency will probably be lower than 80% due to water lost by evaporation and remember this facility is for providing additional backup water supply. The motor / generator is how the LEAF works (ie pumped electrons into the battery on regen) so taking a 90 percent efficiency for the motor and 90 percent efficiency for the generator for 0.9 x 0.9 is where the 80% estimates for the LEAF come from.

 

[Herm]

Pumped hydro storage is usually 70% efficient and that is darned good.. we are spoiled by the 99% efficiency of lithium-ion and 91% for nimh but these are a lot more expensive.. the only problem with pumped hydro is the limited possibilities of locations to use it. I think underground compressed air storage is also interesting, just pump up a spent oil field.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

I don't remember exactly what the efficiency is but pumping water backup hill means you have to overcome gravity which adds to the efficiency equation. no I believe the san diego system what it does is pumps the water backup uphill during periods of low usage so this would be power that would normally not being used anyway so this also provides load balance the system which would artificially increase efficiency as well

 

[davewill]

I don't remember exactly what the efficiency is but pumping water backup hill means you have to overcome gravity which adds to the efficiency equation. ...

Huh? Pumping against gravity is the whole point of water storage of power. The gravity part is the one piece that doesn't add to inefficiency. Inefficiency comes from the pumps themselves, friction losses going up and down, evaporation during storage, generator efficiency, and probably a bunch of other stuff, but not from gravity.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

I don't remember exactly what the efficiency is but pumping water backup hill means you have to overcome gravity which adds to the efficiency equation. ...

Huh? Pumping against gravity is the whole point of water storage of power. The gravity part is the one piece that doesn't add to inefficiency. Inefficiency comes from the pumps themselves, friction losses going up and down, evaporation during storage, generator efficiency, and probably a bunch of other stuff, but not from gravity.

OIC. so we can pump the water into a great big loop and lose nothing but the small inefficiencies of the pump?

sounds like we are going back to the "regen efficiency" discussion.

i know a guy who works for a small electrical utility and he is investigating the question. apparently some use a different technique involved with positioning the pumps in a different area of the diversion tube which is supposed to greatly enhance the performance but he states efficiency is still "significantly below 50%" but he is not sure. he also states the evaporation (for here anyway is not significant since they pump back into the reservoir)

he is supposed to be getting more exact figures but he is just an operator, not an engineer and he doesnt really know.

also i guess the primary reason for doing this is very little power demand at night, erosion controls and maintaining levels in summer so people can go boating and swimming... the last part seems to be the highest priority

 

[thankyouOB]

if my prius were a leaf...

correct grammatical use of the conditional

 

[tbleakne]

I think underground compressed air storage is also interesting, just pump up a spent oil field.

It turns out that thermodynamics sharply limits the efficiency of this process as well. It would be efficient if the process were adiabatic (no heat flow in/out of the chamber), but in fact underground compressed air storage is much closer to isothermal. This means the substantial portion of the energy expended in compressing the gas that becomes heat is lost, dissipating into the rock.

While the efficiency of our little 3.3kW Leaf chargers could be improved, the very high efficiency of the Li battery itself makes EV storage for utility power look very competitive. However, few of us would want to participate in this use of our car batteries all the time, because heavy extra usage would reduce the life of our batteries. More of us might be willing to offer access to our EV batteries for emergency utility storage for sufficient compensation. The additional capital cost would be almost zero, and our own homes would not go dark.

 

[Herm]

Rocks are poor heat conductors, and probably geothermal hot if deep enough, so that the hot air you pump into the spent deep gas fields will remain hot. In any case you would pump up when you have an excess of windpower electricity that no one wants.. then draw it out at peak so that losses would be moot. The advantage of underground compressed air storage is the minimal cost for a massive storage capability. Multiple well points are already drilled with good steel pipes and concrete casings.. none of that stuff is cheap if you have to pay for it.

The other method is using air bladders at the bottom of a lake or the ocean.. that would be very lossy since the water is usually cold.

 

[AndyH]

energy storage is an essential part of wind power generation... otherwise it would be unusable due to the inconsistency of wind. Usually without storage you can have up to 20% wind power as part of the total power generation... more than that and the grid becomes unstable.

Crap. Herm - get on the phone to Denmark! One of their islands - twice the size of Manhattan, thinks they're 100% powered by wind. Please help them - they need your expert guidance! :roll:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=samso-attempts-100-percent-renewable-power

That's a more remarkable achievement given that Samsingers began the process, heating their houses with oil, importing electricity from coal-burning via an undersea transmission line as part of the Jutland grid, and generally leading the CO2-intensive lifestyle we all know and love—with no interest in change.

You also need long term backup, usually in the form of NG peaking plants that fire up at a moments notice.

Sure - as long as we simply add turbines to our currently out of date power grid. The good news is that the info technology world has come up with inexpensive ways to balance loads. Once we get this 'old tech' onto our power grid, the need for peaking is reduced. And since wind is so easy to forecast, "a moments notice" is not necessary even with our old-tech grid.

 

[Herm]

Crap. Herm - get on the phone to Denmark! One of their islands - twice the size of Manhattan, thinks they're 100% powered by wind. Please help them - they need your expert guidance! :roll:

Thanks for the link, good article.. but note:

"TRANEBJERG, Samso, Denmark—It can seem as if the icy, cutting wind off the North Sea never stops blowing on this Danish island in winter "

 

[Lopton]

Crap. Herm - get on the phone to Denmark! One of their islands - twice the size of Manhattan, thinks they're 100% powered by wind. Please help them - they need your expert guidance! :roll:
..........
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=samso-attempts-100-percent-renewable-power
.......
And since wind is so easy to forecast, "a moments notice" is not necessary even with our old-tech grid.

That island that is " technically 100%" powered by wind can only be so because they are connected to a power grid...... Talk to that island when the wind stops blowing, do you think they turn off the lights then?????? :lol:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_grid_integration

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-even-in-denmark/story-e6frg9k6-1111114580943

Best quote from the article is that if you build 10,000MW of wind, you have to have 10,000MW of thermal generation ready to go for when the wind stops blowing, unless you have a means of storing that power (and large scale pumped storage is our current best way to do this). And considering most thermal plants take hours to come online, that means you need to have them running and online at minimum levels constantly, ready for the wind to just die off... Then you have to ramp the thermal plants rapidly (old plants not designed for this) increasing the cycling of the plants leading to more wear and tear on the units and increased costs and pollution.

Also if you think the wind is easy to forecast you are sorely mistaken. Wind is very challenging to forecast as is weather in general (unless the weathermen in your area are way better then every place I have lived). And when do you think the peak energy requirements on the grid are? The hottest sunniest days of the summer, and why is it so stinking hot? Because there is no wind.... Wind on its own is not the answer. If you want see wind power output each day check out the Cal ISO graphs.http://www.caiso.com/market/Pages/ReportsBulletins/DailyRenewablesWatch.aspx

Wind power is a good as part of a balance plan, like most things in life you need a balance, wind on it's own is not acceptable for the reliability you expect from the current power grid... If you think it is go ahead cut your house off from the grid and put up a wind turbine see how well that goes for you.... :roll:

-Matt

PS: Also, try to use wind power to restore from a black out. You can't it does not work. It will rip your small not-grid-connected system to pieces if you put it on without plenty of spinning thermal/hydro generation to balance it out....

 

[AndyH]

Sorry lopton - I put others like Amory Lovins near the top when it comes to a big picture view of how to integrate renewables into the grid - they've been studying it, modeling it, and helping others refine the process. Google or Youtube 'reinventing fire' and/or 'amory loving' for more.

Clearly there's more happening in Denmark than 'just' wind - but it was presented simply to suggest that Herm's 20% impossibility might be a bit low.

And yes - I've read plenty of newpaper and magazine articles telling us how impossible this stuff is to work with. But the story from the people actually DOING it is somewhat different. Guess which I put my faith in?

 

[AndyH]

That island that is " technically 100%" powered by wind can only be so because they are connected to a power grid...... Talk to that island when the wind stops blowing, do you think they turn off the lights then?????? :lol:

Did you catch Herm's post about the 'never ending' wind? Or the comment in the article that they were exporting power via that grid-tied cable even before they got the entire wind farm up? Those blasted engineers - what are they THINKING - putting wind turbines in incredibly windy places?! :lol:

...Also if you think the wind is easy to forecast you are sorely mistaken. Wind is very challenging to forecast as is weather in general (unless the weathermen in your area are way better then every place I have lived). And when do you think the peak energy requirements on the grid are? The hottest sunniest days of the summer, and why is it so stinking hot? Because there is no wind.... Wind on its own is not the answer. If you want see wind power output each day check out the Cal ISO graphs.http://www.caiso.com/market/Pages/ReportsBulletins/DailyRenewablesWatch.aspx

Wind power is a good as part of a balance plan, like most things in life you need a balance, wind on it's own is not acceptable for the reliability you expect from the current power grid... If you think it is go ahead cut your house off from the grid and put up a wind turbine see how well that goes for you.... :roll:

-Matt

With respect Matt, your opinion seems to be from a perspective of 'that's the way we've always done that', and 'any wind conversation must be about McMansions on a 1920's grid.' I know people that are completely off-grid with very small wind (100-500W) and PV. And it works GREAT! Oddly enough, by designing-in efficiency and using the planet instead of fighting it, we just don't need as much electricity as we might think. I just bought PV for my 'retirement V2.0' off-grid house this month. Only needed 8 panels (~1700W) but bought 10 anyway. The small wind turbine going together in the garage will be a bonus. I lived out of this country for a bit over 8 years - it's amazing that that world doesn't start and/or stop at either the California or US border. And no - we do not always do things the 'best' way on this side of either 'pond.'

Also, try to use wind power to restore from a black out. You can't it does not work. It will rip your small not-grid-connected system to pieces if you put it on without plenty of spinning thermal/hydro generation to balance it out....

I hate to break this to you, but 'my' small off-grid system isn't bothered in the least if the grid goes down. Maybe in space no-one can hear you scream, but in off-grid land we don't need no steenkin' blackouts. :lol:

Einstein was very likely correct when he suggested we cannot solve problems from the same mindset that created them...

 

[Lopton]

With respect Matt, your opinion seems to be from a perspective of 'that's the way we've always done that', and 'any wind conversation must be about McMansions on a 1920's grid.' I know people that are completely off-grid with very small wind (100-500W) and PV. And it works GREAT! Oddly enough, by designing-in efficiency and using the planet instead of fighting it, we just don't need as much electricity as we might think. I just bought PV for my 'retirement V2.0' off-grid house this month. Only needed 8 panels (~1700W) but bought 10 anyway. The small wind turbine going together in the garage will be a bonus. I lived out of this country for a bit over 8 years -

And with respect Andy the problem with off the grid wind and solar is you need batteries, and batteries make the system extremely expensive compared to traditional methods of power. If you are already attached to the grid, disconnecting and installing such as system will most likely never pay for itself. Now in the middle of nowhere that is another story....

I don't think just because it has always been done that way means we have to keep doing it. But something has to give, people keep clamoring for green power but no one will let the utilities build the power lines to deal with the intermittent nature of the solar and wind panels, and they won't let the utilities raise their rates to pay for the solar or wind, which right now are more expensive then the fossil fuel solution, and they won't even let them build some solar plants because it will block the light from the desert floor.

On the flip side (and related to this threads original subject) If we had more pumped storage facilities that could help level out the wild swings of the wind power then it would be a much more stable system. I think it is an ideal and rather simple way to store the power, sure it is not the most efficient, but it would allow much more green power to be use IMO. Unfortunately Pumped storage projects will be more then likely limited to small projects in the future due to "environmental issues".

Also I think everyone should have solar on their roofs, I think that would help tremendously, but like it or not when it is blazing hot outside, no wind is blowing, and the grid is at peak load, guess what... solar panels start losing their efficiency and putting out less power.

http://www.reuk.co.uk/Effect-of-Temperature-on-Solar-Panels.htm

My problem is with you claiming the wind power on it's own can support an island with nothing else, it can't. As I stated before balance is the key, and understanding the underlying problems with certain renewable energy's, not just spewing out the wind/solar can save us from the evil fossil fuels.

it's amazing that that world doesn't start and/or stop at either the California or US border. And no - we do not always do things the 'best' way on this side of either 'pond.'

As for me apparently not being able to see out side of California or the USA, that is a piss poor argument my friend, I won't knock where you live because that has no bearing on this.... I argue based on facts and try to back it up with sources, not wish-washy statements about where someone lives...

-Matt
PS: I work as a power systems operator for a utility, I operate this stuff daily, it is my job to run the grid reliably and efficiently. It is also my job to tell the engineers that they were wrong about a lot of stuff that they calculate and model, real life tends to be much harsher then an engineers imagination.

 

[Lopton]

Also, try to use wind power to restore from a black out. You can't it does not work. It will rip your small not-grid-connected system to pieces if you put it on without plenty of spinning thermal/hydro generation to balance it out....

I hate to break this to you, but 'my' small off-grid system isn't bothered in the least if the grid goes down..

*sigh* Yes Andy I understand that your battery back will keep you powered during a black out. But guess what, not everyone can afford one of those, and as far as the power grid goes wind can not restore a system from a black out.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_start#Limitations_on_black_start_sources
http://www.cer.ie/cerdocs/cer03024.pdf Page 74

-Matt
PS: that second link is a great read for some concerns and benefits of wind.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Also if you think the wind is easy to forecast you are sorely mistaken.

sometimes, yes. but wind is relatively easy to predict when the weather is moving primarily over water. now when weather systems move over land, for whatever reason, the paths, timing etc is not all that easy to predict.


once again we have degenerated into "i can find holes in your solution" argument.

now, i am not going to go thru this "every little bit helps" counterpoint. we have been thru that a million times.

fact is, we have a country that is providing for itself in a much greener and sustainable fashion than we are. we can learn from them or cherry pick scenarios on how it wont work for us.

i think wind will help us. it wont solve all our problems but neither will spending ALL our energy debating our options.

 

[Lopton]

fact is, we have a country that is providing for itself in a much greener and sustainable fashion than we are. we can learn from them or cherry pick scenarios on how it wont work for us.

i think wind will help us. it wont solve all our problems but neither will spending ALL our energy debating our options.

Well put

-Matt