CO2 battery

  • Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.

    We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.

    We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.

begreen

Mooderator
Staff member
Hearth Supporter
Nov 18, 2005
110,840
South Puget Sound, WA
Google is partnering with EnergyDome in the deployment of this alternative to chemical batteries in solar installations. The goal is to provide 24/7 carbon-free energy. It looks like a simple, relatively low-tech and economical process based on globally available resources. The first 20 MW / 200 MWh Energy Storage project is now operational on Sardinia with future projects planned for India and the US.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Whitenuckler
Here is a Popular Mechanics article (from 2024):

And a MIT Tech Review (from 2022):

They state the cost is ~$200/kWh. This is not great compared to near future battery tech, but perhaps it can be improved with learning curve? The parts are 'off the shelf'.

I'm more optimistic that Google is into it... they are more sensible than that guy that rhymes with Gill Bates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Whitenuckler
Google is partnering with EnergyDome in the deployment of this alternative to chemical batteries in solar installations. The goal is to provide 24/7 carbon-free energy. It looks like a simple, relatively low-tech and economical process based on globally available resources. The first 20 MW / 200 MWh Energy Storage project is now operational on Sardinia with future projects planned for India and the US.

I like the idea. It would create spinning generation which can supply the grid when there is no sun or wind. Nuclear would be
better if they can make progress on that and get the costs down. The CO2 system sounds pretty safe. CO2 systems are used to put out fires.
 
I sent a link to the dude who runs our ChemE senior design course. He might use it as a design problem in the course... students would design a plant, and try to arrive at a cost/kWh storage figure.

I think the CO2 balloon is HUGE. Like Hindenburg huge. So, basically, you build a (cheap) rigid tent the size of an aircraft hangar, and have an inflatable balloon for the CO2 that you can inflate and deflate inside. My guess is that that is a major capital and maintenance cost.

I would think that you could run the gas side at slightly elevated pressure (like a few bars) without much loss in kWh/ton CO2, and maybe use a geological reservoir for the low pressure side (like a cave or a salt dome). The problem I see with that is that the CO2 probably want to be kept very pure/dry so as to not gunk up the machinery with ice? And free geological reservoirs are rare.
 
I haven't read of geologic storage as an option for this company, but perhaps a big oil company like Chevron or Exxon is exploring that option. They have more mappings of existing salt domes and depleted gas fields. However, I think they are more interested in CO2 sequestration than as a grid power buffer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: woodgeek
I believe that home- or community-based energy generation is the future. My 6.5 KW solar array supplies my electrical needs most of the year, and even generates a surplus that goes into the local grid. You might even possibly be using some of the electrons my system is pushing into the wires right now. Who knows where it ends up after my solar panels generate it from sunshine?

The problem is distribution of surplus energy to distant locations where it is needed.

Maybe if we stop trying to reinvent the wheel, and work together across borders and cultures, we could come up with something worthwhile.
 
  • Like
Reactions: woodgeek
I believe that home- or community-based energy generation is the future. My 6.5 KW solar array supplies my electrical needs most of the year, and even generates a surplus that goes into the local grid. You might even possibly be using some of the electrons my system is pushing into the wires right now. Who knows where it ends up after my solar panels generate it from sunshine?

The problem is distribution of surplus energy to distant locations where it is needed.

Maybe if we stop trying to reinvent the wheel, and work together across borders and cultures, we could come up with something worthwhile.

I wonder if these supercapacitors are any good. They work on DC, so you would think it would match solar.
 
Update on the CO2 dome storage. It looks like Google is planning on using it for its data centers because it can provide longer power cycles than current battery tech.
The Chinese are also rapidly developing their own version.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Whitenuckler
Interesting. What does this sentence mean? "The problem is that even the best new grid-scale storage systems on the market—mainly lithium-ion batteries—provide only about 4 to 8 hours of storage. That’s not long enough..."
I understand that grid scale storage is costly, but couldn't any kind of storage be stretched out to last 10+ hours? In other words, why is a CO2 battery considered 'long duration' or whatever, and lithium-ion is not?
 
I'm not sure lithium storage is only good for so short. My lithium batteries hold it for much longer...
Why would that be different for grid scale (i.e. many smaller batteries grouped)?

Iirc the pressure to get co2 liquid goes up fast with temperature in the range 50 F to 120 F.
Liquid is nice because high density (so less storage space needed - but they then need this gigantic tent (see the pics) whereas for air we use the atmosphere for that part ...
If you use the same total volume of real estate for storage of compressed air, how does the energy/volume compare with this footprint?
 
I took the 4-8 hours for lithium storage numbers as what is reasonably cost effective.
And assumed if they wanted 10 plus hours the added batteries would take it out of cost effective price range?
 
It's not discharge time but storage time that was commented on...?

"provide only about 4 to 8 hours of storage."

Not
"provide only about 4 to 8 hours of power for discharging".

Store in them, walk away for a year...
 
Life span when charged rapidly under high current? Most grid storage systems are designed for the long term of 20+ yrs.
"Lithium-ion batteries are highly suited to short-duration storage (<8h) due to cost and degradation associated with high states of charge."
 
  • Like
Reactions: stoveliker
I think the oft-quoted 4-hour discharge claim (and not longer) is mainly driven by utility or ISO requirements that value 4-hour discharge (and not more) to meet peak-load requirements (usually in the late afternoon/evening) and is not technology-specific to Lithium Ion batteries.

BUT, Lithium Ion batteries were first to commercially meet this need to replace other peaker technologies, and has come to be associated with 4-hour discharge.

Plus, the economic rewards by a utility or ISO are much better for 4-hour discharge than for longer than 4-hour discharge (because that duration overlaps perfectly with high peaker cost). Notably, the IEEE Spectrum article doesn't indicate that their is any interest power utilities for compressed air storage systems.