Professional Documents
Culture Documents
F. R. Zaloudek
R. W. Reilly
July 1982
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the
United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any
agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or
implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process
disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights.
Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by
trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily
constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the
United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of
authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect thoseof the United
States Government or any agency thereof.
Price
Codes
F. R. Zaloudek
R. W. R e i l l y
J u l y 1982
Work Compl eted September 1 981
Prepared f o r
the U.S. Department o f Energy
under Contract DE-AC06-76RLO 1830
P a c i f i c Northwest Laboratory
Richland, Washington 99352
FOREWORD
Compressed a i r energy storage (CAES) i s a technique f o r supplying
e l e c t r i c power t o meet peak l o a d requirements o f e l e c t r i c u t i l i t y systems.
Using low- cost power from base l o a d p l a n t s d u r i n g off- peak periods, a CAES
p l a n t compresses a i r f o r storage i n an underground r e s e r v o i r - - a n a q u i f e r ,
s o l ution - mi ned s a l t cavi t y , o r mined hard rock cavern.
During subsequent
This r e l a t i v e l y new
l e a d l a b o r a t o r y f o r t h e CAES Program.
..
I t was estimated t h a t a
i n a t i m e l y manner.
The h y b r i d CAES concept should a l s o be considered as a candidate
f o r early application.
t o readiness;
I t i s s i m i l a r l y o p e r a t i o n a l l y v i a b l e and c l o s e
however, i t i s l e s s economically a t t r a c t i v e .
The h y b r i d
................................
SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
FIGURES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.0 INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1 CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2 RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.0 CANDIDATE CONCEPT DESCRIPTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1 CONVENTIONAL COMPRESSED AIR ENERGY STORAGE CONCEPT . . . . . .
3.2 ADVANCED COMPRESSED AIR ENERGY STORAGE CONCEPTS. . . . . . . .
FOREWORD
3.2.1
3.2.2
4.0
5.0
v
xi
xii
1.1
2.1
2.2
2.3
3.1
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.8
.....................
......................
3.2.3
A d i a b a t i c Compressed A i r Energy Storage . . . . . . . .
3.2.4 H y b r i d Compressed A i r Energy Storage Concept . . . . . .
ANALYSIS METHOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.1 UTILITY CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2 ECONOMICS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.3 TECHNOLOGICAL READINESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.4 OPERABILITY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.5
iii
EVALUATION PROCEDURE
.....................
........................
NORMALIZATION PROCEDURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.10
3.16
4.1
4.1
4.3
4.3
4.4
4.4
ECONOMIC EVALUATION
5.1
5.1
5.1
5.2
5.3
...........
BUSBARCOST ESTIMATES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.3.1 Technical Parameters and t h e Cost o f Operation . . . . .
5.3.2
Base-Case Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.3.3 High O i 1- P r i c e E s c a l a t i o n Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.3.4 Municipal Financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TECHNICAL AND OPERATIONAL COST PARAMETERS
..............
5.4 DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TECHNOLOGICAL STATUS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.3.5
6.0
6.1
5.6
5.6
5.15
5.15
5.18
5.18
6.1
6.1
6.1.1
6.1
6.1.3
6.1.4
6.2.4
6.2.5
6.3
6.5
6.6
............
........................
REASSESSMENT OF EQUIPMENT AVAILABILITY . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.2.1
Turbomachinery A v a i l a b i l i t y . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.2.2
Commercial Readiness o f t h e Valve I n d u s t r y . . . . . . .
6.2.3
7.0
.......
A d i a b a t i c Compressed A i r Energy Storage Concept . . . .
H y b r i d Compressed A i r Energy Storage Concept . . . . . .
5.4
6.1.2
6.2
S e n s i t i v i t y t o C a p i t a l Cost
5.4
6.7
6.8
6.9
6.9
6.10
6.11
....................
.........
........................
6.3 DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CONCEPT RELATIONSHIPS TO UTILITY OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS . . . . .
7.1 PERFORMANCE FACTORS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
viii
6.71
7.1
7.1
7.2
..........................
Compression Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Power P r o d u c t i o n Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
OPERABILITY
7.3
7.2.1
7.4
7.2.2
.........................
7.3
AVAILABILITY
7.4
PLANT LIFETIME
7.5
ENVIRONMENTAL
7.6
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
........................
AND INSTITUTIONAL MATTERS . . . . . . . . . . . .
..........................
7.5
7.7
7.8
7.9
7.9
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
FIGURES
...
.....
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
5.1
...........................
........................
A d i a b a t i c CAES Cycle Flow Diagram. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Acres Thermal Energy Storage Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
H y b r i d CAES Cycle w i t h Thermal Energy Storage . . . . . . . . . . .
Comparison o f CAES Technologies under Base-Case Conditions . . . .
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
S e n s i t i v i t y o f Economic Performance t o V a r i a t i o n s i n
C a p i t a l Cost
........
.......................
....................
............................
................
...........................
TABLES
Key Operational C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f a CAES/FBC Power P l a n t
.....
3.7
3.11
3.13
....................
...................
...........
H y b r i d CAES System Operating Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C a p i t a l Cost Summary f o r CAES Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . .
Compressed A i r Energy Storage System D e s c r i p t i o n s . . . . . . . . .
NonCAES System D e s c r i p t i o n s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Base-Case F i n a n c i a l and Cost Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A d i a b a t i c CAES System Performance Parameters
3.19
5.5
5.7
5.8
5.9
.....
7.2
.........
7.7
3.15
One program
I t i s a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t t h i s a c t i v i t y w i l l lead t o u t i l i t y
This screening
..
..
Concepts examined f u r t h e r i n
Results o f t h i s
The
assessed.
S e c t i o n 4.0.
2.0
2 t o 3 years.
The CAESIPFBC
v i a b l e i n the foreseeable f u t u r e .
Both h y b r i d and a d i a b a t i c CAES designs appear t o have no s i g n i f i c a n t
operational problems t h a t would preclude u t i l i t y acceptance o f the
basic technology involved.
E i t h e r t h e h y b r i d o r a d i a b a t i c design
u t i l i t i e s w i t h PFBC technology.
i n organizing u t i l i t y p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a demonstration o f t h i s
concept.
Under base
With h i g h - c o s t
l a r g e (2000-MW) UPH p l a n t s .
P r e l i m i n a r y c a p i t a l c o s t estimates f o r
s m a l l e r (1000-MW) UPH p l a n t s i n d i c a t e t h a t v e r y s i g n i f i c a n t c a p i t a l
c o s t increases ($/kW) a r e i n c u r r e d when p l a n t s i z e i s reduced from
,2000 MW t o 1000 MW.
However, no h i g h l y r e l i a b l e c a p i t a l c o s t estimates
CONCLUSIONS
The PNL assessment o f second- generation CAES technology l e d t o t h e
f o l l o w i n g conclusions:
1. The a d i a b a t i c CAES appears t o be t h e most a t t r a c t i v e second- generation
CAES system considered.
I t i s o p e r a t i o n a l l y v i a b l e , economically
a t t r a c t i v e , and c l o s e t o t e c h n o l o g i c a l readiness.
Design of a
i t more a t t r a c t i v e t o some u t i l i t i e s .
2.2
RECOMMENDATIONS
Three recommendations a r e o f f e r e d w i t h respect t o the second-
This research w i l l
as a v i a b l e second-generation concept.
I n t h i s study, n a t u r a l l y
The compressed a i r
lNTERCOOLER
FUEL
I
I
RESERVOIR
FIGURE 3.1.
..
3.2.1
s u b s t i t u t i n g coal as t h e p r i n c i p a l f u e l .
TABLE 3.1.
Annual u t i l i z a t i o n
Capaci ty f a c t o r
71.2 atm
1 562.0F
15.0 atm
3.2.2
I n t h i s concept, a CAES
c y c l e i s i n t e g r a t e d w i t h a coal g a s i f i c a t i o n p l a n t t o o b t a i n s y n e r g i s t i c
b e n e f i t s from t h e various i n t e r n a l a i r and energy flows.
For example,
..
U-Gas
Texaco
Foster WheelerIBCR
Kel logg.
The c y c l e i s
FIGURE 3.3.
Therefore,
c a p a b i l i t y f o r u t i l i t y system load l e v e l i n g .
Adiabatic Compressed A i r Energy Storage
3.2.3
I n t h e a d i a b a t i c CAES c y c l e no f u e l i s consumed.
The heat o f
compression i s stored during the charging c y c l e instead o f being discarded
as i s done i n a conventional CAES p l a n t .
TABLE 3.2.
Gasifier system
Cleanup system
Conoco
Power cycle
Gas turbine
Power, MW
LP turbine
HP turbine
Fuel gas expander
Cool ing ai r expander
Gross output
Auxi 1iaries
Boost compressor
Net output
Heat rate, Btu/kWh
Generation
Compression (a)
Round trip
Compression/generation
Time ratio
TABLE 3.3.
Gasi f ie r system
Cleanup system
Sel ex01
Power c y c l e
Steam generator
Waste heat
2400/1000/1000
Power, MW
LP t u r b i n e
HP t u r b i n e
Fuel gas expander(s)
Cool ing a iia expander
Steam t u r b i n e
Gross o u t p u t
Auxiliaries
Boost compressor
Net o u t p u t
Heat r a t e , BtuIkWh
Genera t i on
Compression (a
>
Round t r i p
Compression/generation
Time r a t i o (b)
(a 'week1 y compression c y c l e w i t h compress; on d u r i n g a1 1 weeknight and
weekend periods when power n o t being generated.
( b ) ~ o r24-hour weekday period.
FIGURE 3.5.
U n i t output (four u n i t s )
Charging r a t i o
Compressor design flow r a t e
Expander design flow r a t e
Compression period
Genera tion period
Storage pressure
Storage temperature
Overall heat r a t e
Plant efficiency
205 MW
1.48
650 Iblsec
750 lblsec
72 hr
10 hr
121 5 psi
125F
14,800 BtuIkWh
0.23
TES I
226 psia
2600 1 blsec
870
460
0.966
5 psi
TES I1
1215 psia
2600 1 b/sec
830
1 00
0.966
4 psi
range of TES types and materials to find a preferred design. This final
design consists of sensible heat storage beds composed of sintered iron
oxide pebbles. These beds are contained in a mined hard rock cavern for
pressure containment. Bypass a i r from storage keeps the cavern walls
cool. I t i s expected that the TES beds will slowly comminute due to the
effects of thermal cycling. Therefore, particulate separators are
provided to remove the detritus from the a i r to protect the turbines
from erosion damage. Figure 3.6 shows a cross section of the Acres TES
design.
3.2.4
CONVECTIVE
COOL1NG
S PACE
TES STEEL
CYLINDRICAL
TANK BED
yi
I:.:
+:.
&.
O ~ ~ E T
FIGURE 3.6.
CONCRETE
s u PPORTS
I n t h i s cycle, a i r i s stored
Air
During discharge,
This a i r i s f u r t h e r
I r o n oxide such as
o f i n s u f f i c i e n t a v a i l a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n regarding i t s properties.
@Denstone 57 i s an alumina- sil i c a product o f the Norton Company.
HP COMPRESSOR
CAVERN
FIGURE 3 . 7 .
TABLE 3.5.
U n i t output
220 MWe
Compression hours
8.61 hr/day
Genera ti on hours
8 hr/day
Charging r a t i o
1 .038
O v e r a l l p l a n t heat r a t e
Fuel consumption
Overall plant efficiency
661 1 b l s e c
Expander design f l o w r a t e
712 l b / s e c
Storage
Pressure
Temperature
1204 p s i a
789 p s i a
140F
3
0.667 ft /sec
Temperature h o t a i r i n
91 6F
Temperature h o t a i r o u t
860F
Maximum i n 1e t p x s s u r e
241 p s i a
4.0
ANALYSIS METHOD
Activities
UTILITY CONSIDERATIONS
The c a p i t a l - i n t e n s i v e and h i g h l y regulated nature o f e l e c t r i c a l
One o b j e c t i v e o f t h e
.
..
4.
..
..
a short- term l o a d l e v e l i n g f a c i l i t y .
5..
These include:
4.2
ECONOMICS
The economic analyses associated w i t h K a r a l i s e t a l . (1981), Hobson
e t a1
(1981), Giramonti e t a1
Due t o s i t e and u t i l i t y -
To f a c i l i t a t e
4.3
TECHNOLOGICAL READINESS
4.4
OPERABILITY
The f a c t o r s considered i n d e f i n i n g t h e o p e r a b i l i t y o f a CAES p l a n t
design included:
i t s a d a p t a b i l i t y t o t h e charge- discharge c y c l e d e f i n e d by i t s
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n as an i n t e r m e d i a t e o r peak power f a c i 1i t y
s t a r t u p and shutdown c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
p l a n t l o a d - f o l lowing c a p a b i l i t y
p l a n t a v a i l a b i l i t y comparable t o competing technologies
p l a n t l i f e t i m e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h expectations f o r power generating
equipment.
These f a c t o r s were examined as p a r t o f each conceptual design study
EVALUATION PROCEDURE
The o b j e c t i v e o f t h i s a n a l y s i s was n o t t o s e l e c t t h e best second-
The
5.0
ECONOMIC EVALUATION
..
.
such as
..
conventional ( o i 1- f i r e d ) CAES
o i 1 - f i r e d combustion t u r b i n e s
underground pumped hydro storage (UPHS)
advanced combined c y c l e
storage b a t t e r i e s .
To avoid t h i s problem, a
5.1
NORMALIZATION PROCEDURE
The major features o f t h e normalization procedure a r e described i n
t h e f o l 1owing paragraphs.
A l l c o s t estimates were converted t o midyear 1979 p r i c e l e v e l s ,
Conventional
A l l turbomachinery costs i n t h e design studies represent one-of-ak i n d b i d estimates, except f o r t h e CAES/FBC study, whose c o s t estimate
was based upon a production r u n o f 50.
The turbomachinery c o s t
The
(Each transmission
e l i m i n a t e d from t h e c o s t estimates.
the mu1t i m i l l i o n
F i f t e e n percent
t h e r e l a t i v e uncertainties:
The
systems, however.
I n t e r e s t during construction (IDC) and escalation during construction
(EDC) were n o t included as p a r t o f the t o t a l c a p i t a l cost.
These itenis
Most o f the e f f o r t
5.3
., heat
r a t e , EER, storage c a p a c i t y ) f o r
No changes were
Operating
Base-Case R e s u l t s
The assumptions employed i n t h e base case a r e l i s t e d i n Table 5.4.
o n l y a t t h e h i g h c a p a c i t y f a c t o r s f o r t h e h i g h compression energy c o s t
situation.
Oa)
0
CU
1
I
I
CU
m o o
TABLE 5.4.
Parameter
Fixed charge r a t e
Discount r a t e
Inflation r a t e
Escalation r a t e s
Fuel o i l
Coal
Compression energy
Capital expenditures
O&M
Energy prices (July 1979)
Fuel o i l
Coal
Baseload e l e c t r i c i t y
System lifetime
S t a r t of plant operation
Base year f o r cost estimates
Value
18% per yr
10% per y r
6% per y r
8% per
7% per
7% per
6% per
6% per
yr
yr
yr
yr
yr
$5.24/lo6 B t u
$1 .86/106 D t u
10, 25 mills/kWh
30 years ( a )
1990
July 1979
10 mills
0.15
>
-.
0.20
0.25
--- FBC
CG ICYCL
---- HYBRID
.--.--
... -...
-FIGURE 5 . 1 .
CONV
ADIABATIC
10 mills
---
......
..........
.......
.... ....
\ .-.
\ .'
..
\
I
COMBUSTION
-( TURBINE
................
...
.................................
.
'\
'
-...
OIL-FIRED
COMBINED CYCLE
-...-
AD1 ABATI C
&AES
CAES
I
b mills
s-
COMBUSTION
TURBINE
COMBINED CYCLE
-................
...--
FIGURE 5.2.
10 mills
*%..
'$\
"\ \
"'
CONVENT1ONAL
/'\
CAE S..
-.i.
'*\
UPHS
.*.'
*\
...-...
--
5
loo
a
*.-
COWEMIONAL CAES
ADIABATIC CAES
UpHS
I
..*-...
ADIABATIC
CAES
Og***-.
-.-
3%
25 mills
CONVENTIONAL
CAES
... -...
**
00
CONVENTIONAL CAES
ADIABATIC CAES
UPHS
I
150
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
o. n
CAPACITY FACTOR
All storage units are sized for 10 hours of storage. plant lifetime is 50 years. CAES turbomachinery
and TES fill are replaced after 50 years of operation.
FIGURE 5.3.
I n F i g u r e 5.2,
c y c l e ) technologies.
A t the
high compression energy cost, both CAES techno1ogies have lower power
costs than t h e combustion turbine, b u t t h e o i 1- f i r e d combined c y c l e
power costs a r e lower than both o f t h e CAES technologies.
I n Figure 5.3,
under a l l circumstances.
However, r e d u c t i o n i n p l a n t s i z e can s i g n i f i c a n t l y
However, t h e c a p i t a l
T h i s makes i d e n t i f i c a t i o n
However, i t
10 mills
LEAD
ACID
BATER
ADIABATIC
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
CAPACITY FACTOR
--
FIGURE 5.4.
ADIABATIC CAES
5.3.3
Municipal Financing
The c o s t of c a p i t a l and f i x e d charge r a t e employed i n t h e a n a l y s i s
These r a t e s
The
e f f e c t o f a m u n i c i p a l u t i l i t y f i n a n c i n g s t r u c t u r e on t h e economic performance
of t h e CAES t e c h n o l o g i e s i s i l l u s t r a t e d i n F i g u r e 5.6.
The assumed c o s t
h i g h l y c a p i t a l - i n t e n s i v e technologies, and t h i s e f f e c t i s e v i d e n t i n t h e
curves.
c o n s i d e r a b l e advantage o v e r i t s c l o s e s t competitors; a t t h e h i g h e r
compression energy c o s t , a d i a b a t i c CAES m a i n t a i n s a small advantage o v e r
i t s competitors, except below 12% c a p a c i t y f a c t o r , where t h e o i l - f i r e d
combined c y c l e p l a n t i s l e a s t expensive.
-- ---10 mills
-'GBUSTI~
TURBINE
---- --
C O G S T I O N
TURBINE
OIL-FIRED
................
...-,
-I
-.--.
-- 2
FIGURE 5.5.
CAPACllY FACTOR
COMBUSTION N R B INE
OIL+ IRED COMBINED CYCLE
CONVENTIONAL CAES
CGICONT
,HYBRID
: FBC
: CGICYCL
ADIABATIC
--TziF
10 mills
TURBINE
OIL- FIRED
COMBINED CYCLE
ADIABATIC
I
COMBUSTION
COMBINED CYCLE
125
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
-----
FIGURE 5.6.
5.3.5
S e n s i t i v i t y t o C a p i t a l Cost
F i g u r e 5.7 i n d i c a t e s the e f f e c t o f varying c a p i t a l c o s t upon the
The i n s i d e bracketing l i n e s
.
-
10 mills
\
\. .......'..
...... 3..
.......
...
...
'"-..-CONVENTIONAL
CAES
75
0.05
.....
ADIABATIC
CAES
. . . . . . . .e
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
CAPACITY FACTOR
...-...
CONVENTIONAL CAES
5.4
DISCUSSION
Through t h e b r i e f analyses developed here, i t appears t h a t a d i a b a t i c
technology i n :
a l l cases a t low compression energy costs
The r e q u i r e d c a p a c i t y w i t h a c a p a c i t y
Adiabati,~
I n t h e base
Under h i g h f u e l - o i 1 e s c a l a t i o n r a t e s i t i s considerably
Under municipal f i n a n c i n g i t i s
Hybrid CAES,
f o r by the s a l t cavern.
The
6.0
TECHNOLOGICAL STATUS
Design o r component
a v a i l a b i l i t y problems t h a t might preclude t h e design and c o n s t r u c t i o n o f
a demonstration p l a n t i n t h e l a t e 1980s a r e pointed out.
6.1
Most r e p o r t s concluded
t h a t no s i g n i f i c a n t b a r r i e r s t o technical f e a s i b i l i t y e x i s t .
However,
t e c h n i c a l l y v i a b l e i n t h i s time frame.
..
.
Pebble bed
containment vessel w a l l stresses due t o thermal expansion a r e unknown,
b u t do n o t appear t o be severe o r uncontrollable.
Prediction o f the
Performance p r e d i c t i o n i s ,
Although no
"
The
the i n t e r n a l
These include:
the a i r compressors
t h e t u r b i n e stop and c o n t r o l valves
t h e motor generator
t h e gearcase
t h e clutches
t h e heat exchangers and recuperator."
Thermal Energy Storage.
Thus,
."
The e f f e c t o f erosion
Methods must be
"
However, i t i s
There a r e serious
These
I t appears t h a t
A number o f
For
a v a r i e t y o f reasons t h i s work has n o t advanced s u f f i c i e n t l y t o r e l i a b l y
estimate t h e commercialization p o t e n t i a l of t h i s technology.
I f the
6.2
.
.
.
.
w i t h program needs.
.
.
..
Turbomachinery Availability
.
.
.
6.2.2
The ENTEC study revealed that pipes operating under ACAES conditions
are readily avai lab1e. However, 1arge-diameter pipe (greater than 90 in. )
wi 11 be designed and manufactured under ASME pressure vessel code Session
VIII, Division I, rather than piping codes specified under ANSI B31.3.
The code variance will not affect pipe availability although it will
have an impact on its cost.
Thermal expansion of the well casing is routinely handled by the
oillgas industry when the wells operate at temperatures less than 650F.
Temperatures greater than 650F will require significant developmental
work in both cement material and cementing practices.
- The
- Procedures and m a t e r i a l
6.2.5
.
6.3
..
7.0
..
.
These
f a c t o r s i n z l ude:
performance parameters
o p e r a b i l i t y as a peaking p l a n t
plant availability
environmental and i n s t i t u t i o n a l considerations.
I n f o r m a t i o n provided i n t h e conceptual design r e p o r t s was used as
t h e p r i n c i p a l basis f o r the discussions t o f o l l o w .
PERFORMANCE FACTORS
The p r i n c i p a l performance f a c t o r s f o r t h e s u b j e c t second-generation
For comparison, t h i s t a b l e
The parameters 1i s t e d a r e r e l a t e d t o
Its
Both t h e CAESICG
However, CAES/FBC
(1980).
This may be
on p o t e n t i a l l y scarce petroleum f u e l s .
handling, combustor, e f f l u e n t / f u e l
..
..
O p e r a b i l i t y includes considerations o f :
startup
load - following
shutdown
unpowered t r a n s i e n t
consistency o f these operations w i t h planned peaking operation.
The CAES/CG concept has special problems regarding o p e r a b i l i t y .
The
use o f a continuous g a s i f i e r , on t h e o t h e r hand, appears t o be t e c h n i c a l l y
viable.
capacity from a g r i d .
I t should be c l a s s i f i e d more as a l o a d - f o l l o w i n g
p l a n t and n o t s t r i c t l y a peaking p l a n t .
Compression Phase
Startup
I n i t i a l compression mode s t a r t u p a f t e r c o n s t r u c t i o n o r f o l l o w i n g
decompression and cooldown f o r maintenance r e q u i r e s special consideration.
The compressors must be accelerated t o speed before they can be connected
t o the g r i d .
..
The
w i l l d r a i n away.
The remainder
The lower l i m i t s d i c t a t e d
Startup
Both ACAES and h y b r i d CAES enjoy t h e same r a p i d s t a r t u p c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
of conventional CAES.
designs could respond t o both normal system peak demands and t o emergencies
such as l o s s o f a base load p l a n t .
The s t a r t u p o f a CAESIPFBC p l a n t i s
I n the h y b r i d design, a t r i m
I n ACAES, thermal breakthrough
This
o f a CAES/PFBC p l a n t .
Unexpected Transients
The unexpected t r a n s i e n t of p r i n c i p a l concern i s t h e sudden l o s s o f
load such as may occur from a transmission f a u l t and t r i p o f t h e p l a n t ' s
main l o a d c i r c u i t breakers.
The sudden l o s s
c o r r e c t i o n o f the f a u l t .
If
7.3
AVAILABILITY
The estimated a v a i l a b i l i t i e s o f the CAES concepts under consideration
More components
These include:
TABLE 7.2.
Concept
Estimated A v a i l a b i l i t y
Conventional CAES
76
Adiabatic CAES
70
80%
Hybrid CAES
76
86%
CAES/CG
Not Estimated
CAES/PFBC
Not Estimated
7.4
86%
PLANT LIFETIME
A l l second-generation
However, recent r e s u l t s of
7.5
7.6
DISCUSSION
Neither hybrid CAES nor ACAES plant design appears t o have significant
operational problems that would preclude u t i l i t y acceptance. Perhaps
the hybrid design might be perceived as a superior concept by a u t i l i t y
forecasting the a v a i l a b i l i t y of sufficient fuel o i l because of i t s
a t t r a c t i v e heat r a t e and near-uni ty charging r a t i o . On the other hand,
i f petroleum fuels become essentially unavailable, ACAES may appear mo7e
a t t r a c t i v e because of i t s total nondependence on such fuel, despite
The o n l y s i g n i f i c a n t
However,
Furthermore,
Therefore,
C o n t i n u o u s - f i r e d CAESIFBC and
REFERENCES
Acres American, I n c . 1980. P r e l i m i n a r y Design Study o f Underground Pumped
Hydro and Compressed A i r Energy Storage i n Hard Rock, Volume X I . P l a n t
UPH. B u f f a l o , New York.
Design
1979.
Palo
DISTRIBUTION
No o f
Copies
No o f
Copies
OFFSITE
US Department of Energy
Attn: R.A. Dunlop
D i v i s i o n o f E l e c t r i c Energy Sys.
12 & Pennsylvania
Washington, DC 20585
5
US Department o f Energy
Attn: I. Gyuk
O f f i c e o f Energy Systems Res.
F o r r e s t a l Bui 1ding, CE-142
1000 Independence Ave. , S W .
Washington, DC 20585
US Department o f Energy
A t t n : R. Shivers
O f f i c e o f Energy Systems Res.
F o r r e s t a l B u i l d i n g , CE-142
1000 Independence Ave. , S.W.
Washington, DC 20585
US Department o f Energy
A t t n : J.H. Swisher
O f f i c e o f Energy Systems Res.
F o r r e s t a l Building, CE-142
1000 Independence Ave. , S W.
Washington, DC 20585
27
No o f
Copies
No o f
Copies
Louisiana State U n i v e r s i t y
Attn: R.L. Thoms
I n s t i t u t e f o r Environmental Studies
Room 42, Atkinson Hal 1
Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Sandia Laboratories
A t t n : W i l l i a m G. Wilson
PO Box 969
Organization 8453
Livermore, CA 94550
Sandi a Laboratories
A t t n : R.O. Woods
Organization 471 5
A1buquerque , NM 8711 5
Massachusetts I n s t i t u t e o f Tech.
Northern Research & Eng. Corp.
A t t n : J e r r y 0. Melconian
39 Olympia Avenue
Woburn, MA 01801
No o f
Copies
U n i v e r s i t y o f Michigan
A t t n : Donald L. Katz
Dept. o f Chemical Engineering
2042 E. Engr. Bldg.
Ann Arbor, M I 48109
Westinghouse E l e c t r i c Corp.
A t t n : W.F. Kobett
CAES P r o j e c t Manager
Corr~bustionTurbine Sys. Div.
Long Range Develop-Lab 100
PO Box 251
Concordvi 11e, PA 19331
ONSITE
DOE Richland Operations O f f i c e
H. E. Ranson/D .R.
Segna
P a c i f i c Northwest Laboratory
L.D. Kannberg (15)
R.W. R e i l l y ( 5 )
F.R. Zaloudek ( 5 )
Technical Information ( 5 )
Pub1i s h i n g Coordination ( 2 )