00:00 Introduction 00:09 Problem we are facing 04:36 Cryogenic Energy Storage 07:36 HighView Design 13:10 Actual Reality 17:33 Future we hope for 21:49 Thank you
If the goal is to build these at 1000-2000 MW scale, I have a suggestion: add a Nuclear reactor to the cryogenic air system. Context: Build a Boiling Water Reactor, with a max water pressure of 5-6 bars. At those measly pressures, temperatures in the reactor would barely reach 150 deg C. (Please note that I am only talking about the reactor only i.e. Only the heat generating element. I am not saying use steam from the reactor to run steam turbine.) Use heat from the reactor to pre-heat the Nitrogen before expanding it in the turbine. Benefit: You can get much higher efficiency in the plant, or much less Nitrogen will be required to be stored as working fluid. Building a Nuclear reactor (even the low pressure variant I suggested) still will be expensive, but it may be possible to absorb those costs if one is building storage at GW scales.
There are three considerations that I focus on. First, liquid oxygen will be an important commodity in the future for carbon capture. Second, liquid nitrogen is one of the few zero-emission means of transporting renewable electricity long distances. Third, replacing large HVAC systems with liquid nitrogen expansion turbines and heat exchangers would reduce the strain on the electric grids in the hottest cities. Liquefication plants would be able to store electricity and generate pure oxygen for added revenue. Countries like Mongolia would benefit massively from cheap waste heat in the Winter months for district heating systems and cities all over the world would benefit from the waste cold. I get the impression Saudi Arabia would sign a 20-year deal with Mongolia for liquid nitrogen if they could. With enough scale, shipments of liquid nitrogen could replace LNG. Buildings all over China already have LNG tanks for Winter. They could be the first to install Liquid Nitrogen HVAC systems. Unlike the urban heating effect of conventional HVAC, liquid nitrogen should decrease the temperature of the surrounding area the more it's used.
carbon capture does not work as physics does not allow it . Meaning if u got 1kw of power from releaseing 1kg of CO2 there is no way in thermodynamic where you can bound it to something and store it same as coal did for lesss then 1kw . trick is to notshow round trip energy cost so creat a false sence of CCS . Heck even at that u need 2650 kwh for 1 ton & u will realease 2.6 ton from coal & 1.1 ton from gas plants (as it has lot of energy in hydrogen bond) that is not even close to nutral . Stupid answer we will run it form renewables answer if we had renewables we would not be releasing CO2 in the first place . BEST carbon capture is no emission . "liquid nitrogen is one of the few zero-emission means of transporting renewable electricity long distances" WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING Just no not even close best is HVDC that is why world is building HVDC intelings that are in 1000's of km The Zhundong-Wannan UHVDC line 1100 kV, 3400 km INDIA North-East Agra 800kV, 1,728 km North Sea link (NLS) 525 kV DC, 720 km undersea "waste cold" does not exist physic does not allow it "liquid nitrogen should decrease the temperature of the surrounding area the more it's used. " no all it will do is creat a suffocation hazard
@@s2tenglish Whether you like CCS or not, it's the only way to remove billions of tons of CO2 from the atmosphere. The later half of the century will require a lot of CCS to stabilize the environment. I'm smoking LEARN TO USE PUNCTUATION, and I didn't even mention HVDC. I wasn't saying HVDC isn't a good option. You might also notice that the world is bigger than "1000's of km." This is why countries like Australia are planning to export renewable energy as hydrogen and ammonia. Boats go farther than cables. If you worked at an LNG regasification plant, you would understand what I mean by "waste cold." If both the heat from compression and the cold from vaporization can be used productively, where the compression and vaporization happens doesn't impact the efficiency.
@@jameslooker4791 CCS will not happen by human hands , only nature can do it without creating more CO2 in the process. EG Make sea weed biofuel & bury it underground as oil (undoing what we did ) slow but stable. It also solve 2nd law of thermodynamics. Australia are planning to export renewable energy as hydrogen and ammonia. Boats go farther than cables. JUST WOW ,now that is just RAW stupidity. Cable goes far & works 24X7 eg Morocco-UK Power Project 3,800 km & Sun CableAustralia to Singapore 3861 km . If you want you can connect all the land mass,same way we did with undersea fiber.HVDC does not have distance limit as its doesnt have skin effect & capacitance loss. "waste cold" can only be used in a very limited Fashion.The moment you put load on, it will drop the COP of the Refrigeration cycle. That is why we dont do much with "waste cold" some use YES, but use it as power with load NOPE . That is why I said there is no WASTE COLD
@@s2tenglish There are lots of cheap sources of non-fossil carbon that can be buried. Trying to say "physics doesn't allow it" and "waste cold doesn't exist" then responding "I said XXXX because it's basically true." just makes you sound like you should be on Twitter, not RUclips. If you don't want to engage, don't bother trying to find a clever line to say it. HVDC being your favorite method of transmitting renewable electricity doesn't mean other methods won't also be implemented. We're not going to see Western Australia powering Seoul with HVDC just because of low electrical loss. Hydrogen, nitrogen and ammonia can reach from Chile to Tokyo as easily as LNG. Places with the cheapest RE in the world don't want to be constrained to only selling to their region of the globe.
"There are lots of cheap sources of non-fossil carbon that can be buried" just NO, where are u getting this sort of ideas ? if we did we would have fixed global warming long ago. Yes there are carbon sequestration method that are "non-fossil" but non of them are fast enough & BIG enough to take care of 35 billion metric tons CO2 per year. "waste cold exist" so u want to prove 2nd law of thermodynamics wrong well GOOD LUCK . Be mind full many things give impression of working but in depth & holistically they always have gothcha . Just because you can ship from Chile to Tokyo does not mean you have to that is the whole core point of renewable energy that they are so spread out most human populations centers have more then "enough" that is "near enough ". LNG is not good enough that is why we use gas pipe ,same goes with all form of energy if you can just pipe it that would be better than shipping & HVDC is long range enough that it beats any from of transport in mwh "Transfered"
Great video this technology was invented back in the 1800's so as you correctly say nothing new. Highview have simply added heat and cold storage nothing amazing there really.
Good analysis. There is a lot of promise with this cryo-energy storage technology. Very easy to apply in any location safely.
Fair point
00:00 Introduction
00:09 Problem we are facing
04:36 Cryogenic Energy Storage
07:36 HighView Design
13:10 Actual Reality
17:33 Future we hope for
21:49 Thank you
Thanks
If the goal is to build these at 1000-2000 MW scale, I have a suggestion: add a Nuclear reactor to the cryogenic air system.
Context: Build a Boiling Water Reactor, with a max water pressure of 5-6 bars. At those measly pressures, temperatures in the reactor would barely reach 150 deg C. (Please note that I am only talking about the reactor only i.e. Only the heat generating element. I am not saying use steam from the reactor to run steam turbine.)
Use heat from the reactor to pre-heat the Nitrogen before expanding it in the turbine.
Benefit: You can get much higher efficiency in the plant, or much less Nitrogen will be required to be stored as working fluid.
Building a Nuclear reactor (even the low pressure variant I suggested) still will be expensive, but it may be possible to absorb those costs if one is building storage at GW scales.
very bad IDEA
There are three considerations that I focus on. First, liquid oxygen will be an important commodity in the future for carbon capture. Second, liquid nitrogen is one of the few zero-emission means of transporting renewable electricity long distances. Third, replacing large HVAC systems with liquid nitrogen expansion turbines and heat exchangers would reduce the strain on the electric grids in the hottest cities.
Liquefication plants would be able to store electricity and generate pure oxygen for added revenue.
Countries like Mongolia would benefit massively from cheap waste heat in the Winter months for district heating systems and cities all over the world would benefit from the waste cold. I get the impression Saudi Arabia would sign a 20-year deal with Mongolia for liquid nitrogen if they could. With enough scale, shipments of liquid nitrogen could replace LNG.
Buildings all over China already have LNG tanks for Winter. They could be the first to install Liquid Nitrogen HVAC systems. Unlike the urban heating effect of conventional HVAC, liquid nitrogen should decrease the temperature of the surrounding area the more it's used.
carbon capture does not work as physics does not allow it . Meaning if u got 1kw of power from releaseing 1kg of CO2 there is no way in thermodynamic where you can bound it to something and store it same as coal did for lesss then 1kw . trick is to notshow round trip energy cost so creat a false sence of CCS . Heck even at that u need 2650 kwh for 1 ton & u will realease 2.6 ton from coal & 1.1 ton from gas plants (as it has lot of energy in hydrogen bond) that is not even close to nutral . Stupid answer we will run it form renewables answer if we had renewables we would not be releasing CO2 in the first place . BEST carbon capture is no emission .
"liquid nitrogen is one of the few zero-emission means of transporting renewable electricity long distances"
WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING
Just no not even close best is HVDC that is why world is building HVDC intelings that are in 1000's of km
The Zhundong-Wannan UHVDC line 1100 kV, 3400 km
INDIA North-East Agra 800kV, 1,728 km
North Sea link (NLS) 525 kV DC, 720 km undersea
"waste cold" does not exist physic does not allow it
"liquid nitrogen should decrease the temperature of the surrounding area the more it's used. "
no all it will do is creat a suffocation hazard
@@s2tenglish
Whether you like CCS or not, it's the only way to remove billions of tons of CO2 from the atmosphere. The later half of the century will require a lot of CCS to stabilize the environment.
I'm smoking LEARN TO USE PUNCTUATION, and I didn't even mention HVDC. I wasn't saying HVDC isn't a good option. You might also notice that the world is bigger than "1000's of km." This is why countries like Australia are planning to export renewable energy as hydrogen and ammonia. Boats go farther than cables.
If you worked at an LNG regasification plant, you would understand what I mean by "waste cold." If both the heat from compression and the cold from vaporization can be used productively, where the compression and vaporization happens doesn't impact the efficiency.
@@jameslooker4791 CCS will not happen by human hands , only nature can do it without creating more CO2 in the process. EG Make sea weed biofuel & bury it underground as oil (undoing what we did ) slow but stable. It also solve 2nd law of thermodynamics.
Australia are planning to export renewable energy as hydrogen and ammonia. Boats go farther than cables. JUST WOW ,now that is just RAW stupidity. Cable goes far & works 24X7 eg Morocco-UK Power Project 3,800 km & Sun CableAustralia to Singapore 3861 km . If you want you can connect all the land mass,same way we did with undersea fiber.HVDC does not have distance limit as its doesnt have skin effect & capacitance loss.
"waste cold" can only be used in a very limited Fashion.The moment you put load on, it will drop the COP of the Refrigeration cycle. That is why we dont do much with "waste cold" some use YES, but use it as power with load NOPE .
That is why I said there is no WASTE COLD
@@s2tenglish
There are lots of cheap sources of non-fossil carbon that can be buried. Trying to say "physics doesn't allow it" and "waste cold doesn't exist" then responding "I said XXXX because it's basically true." just makes you sound like you should be on Twitter, not RUclips. If you don't want to engage, don't bother trying to find a clever line to say it.
HVDC being your favorite method of transmitting renewable electricity doesn't mean other methods won't also be implemented. We're not going to see Western Australia powering Seoul with HVDC just because of low electrical loss. Hydrogen, nitrogen and ammonia can reach from Chile to Tokyo as easily as LNG. Places with the cheapest RE in the world don't want to be constrained to only selling to their region of the globe.
"There are lots of cheap sources of non-fossil carbon that can be buried" just NO, where are u getting this sort of ideas ? if we did we would have fixed global warming long ago.
Yes there are carbon sequestration method that are "non-fossil" but non of them are fast enough & BIG enough to take care of 35 billion metric tons CO2 per year.
"waste cold exist" so u want to prove 2nd law of thermodynamics wrong well GOOD LUCK .
Be mind full many things give impression of working but in depth & holistically they always have gothcha .
Just because you can ship from Chile to Tokyo does not mean you have to that is the whole core point of renewable energy that they are so spread out most human populations centers have more then "enough" that is "near enough ".
LNG is not good enough that is why we use gas pipe ,same goes with all form of energy if you can just pipe it that would be better than shipping & HVDC is long range enough that it beats any from of transport in mwh "Transfered"
Great video this technology was invented back in the 1800's so as you correctly say nothing new. Highview have simply added heat and cold storage nothing amazing there really.
amazing is to mix the tech in such a way to improve round trip efficiency without it its useless