Engineering Papers⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Hume, Scott Alexander

Publications and source records attributed to Hume, Scott Alexander.

Concrete Thermal Energy Storage Enabling Flexible Operation without Coal Plant Cycling

The work described in this report is responsive to the Office of Fossil Energy program “Energy Storage for Fossil Power Generation.” The pilot plant built as a result of this project demonstrated the feasibility and performance of a concrete thermal energy storage (CTES) system integrated with a supercritical coal power plant. The 10 MWh electrical (>25 MWh thermal) CTES unit, developed by Storworks Power, was designed to enable flexible operation of coal plants without cycling damage. The project's key technical achievements showcase a significant advancement in energy storage technology. A modular CTES system using 42 “Bolderblocs” units was successfully designed and constructed at Alabama Power’s Plant Gaston Unit 5, with each block containing embedded stainless-steel coils in specialized, cost-effective high-temperature concrete. The system interfaced seamlessly with the plant's 3500 psig (241 barg), 1000°F (538°C) supercritical steam, demonstrating operational flexibility. Over 86 full cycles, the CTES exhibited rapid charging and discharging capabilities, effectively mimicking steam turbine feed conditions and handling varying load profiles and storage durations. Performance validation confirmed the system's ability to consistently meet design target steam conditions of 75 bar-a and ~400°C for nominal baseline discharge. The concrete material withstood repeated thermal cycling without degradation, validating earlier lab-scale tests. Integration of balance of plant components, including a condensate management system with storage tank and air-cooled condenser, minimized plant interfaces and water consumption. A robust control scheme ensured safe, automated operation across various scenarios. Key learnings from the project were invaluable: 1. Initial concrete drying and commissioning procedures were refined for future deployments, enhancing efficiency in subsequent installations. 2. System flexibility exceeded expectations, with rapid response to changing conditions. 3. Design improvements were identified including optimized insulation and piping that will enhance overall system efficiency in future deployments 4. Full cycle thermal roundtrip efficiencies exceeded 88%. While the roundtrip electrical efficiency was somewhat limited by known challenges using input steam, such constraints may be mitigated by swapping steam for hot air as thermal input. 5. A summary of key performance parameters for the pilot test and predicted performance of a full scale commercial system with specified improvements determined from the pilot are shown in Section 8. The project faced challenges, including COVID-19 delays and host plant availability constraints. However, these were overcome through adaptive planning and execution. The successful management of these obstacles demonstrated the resilience and adaptability of the project team and the robustness of the CTES technology. This successful pilot demonstrates the potential for CTES to enhance coal plant flexibility, supporting grid stability as renewable penetration increases. The validated design and operational data provide a solid foundation for scaling up to utility-scale implementations, potentially transforming how thermal plants operate in evolving energy landscapes. The system's ability to rapidly respond to changing grid conditions while maintaining high efficiency makes it a promising solution for balancing intermittent renewable energy sources. Furthermore, the project highlighted the potential for even greater efficiencies in future iterations. The use of air as an input medium could potentially eliminate the limitations observed with steam input, opening new possibilities for energy storage applications beyond coal plant integration. In conclusion, this pilot project not only achieved its primary goals but also uncovered additional benefits and potential applications of the CTES technology. It represents a significant step forward in addressing the challenges of grid stability and flexibility in an increasingly renewable-driven energy landscape.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

Liquid Salt Combined-Cycle Pilot Plant Design

The work described in this report is responsive to the Office of Fossil Energy program ‘Energy Storage for Fossil Power Generation.’ This Phase I report has been prepared by Pintail Power LLC, with support from Nexant ECA, Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and Southern Company Services as a deliverable for the U.S. Department of Energy for NETL Award DE-FE-00320016. The Liquid Salt Combined Cycle™ (LSCC™) technology provides large-scale energy storage integrated with Fossil Electric Generating Units (FEGUs) to meet critical needs in the energy transition by providing: • the lowest cost large-scale storage for time-shifting of renewable energy, • superior fuel efficiency to reduce GHGs from dispatchable resources, • flexible capacity and ramping to balance variability of wind and solar resources, • essential grid stability services to assure reliability of a low-carbon grid. The LSCC approach: • employs equipment that has already been proven in utility service, • uses safe, non-toxic, non-degrading, perpetual-life storage medium, • leverages and repurposes existing FEGU assets, • expands the value stack of energy storage to reduce market, financing, and commodity risks. Pintail Power has developed the LSCC technology to meet the need for reliable, efficient, and cost-effective integration of Variable Renewable Energy (VRE) into a low-carbon electric grid by coupling proven thermal energy storage with proven gas turbines, steam turbines, and heat transfer equipment. This novel approach is intended to address the key issues facing the grid and operators of renewable and fossil generating units including: • Overgeneration and curtailment of renewables, • Need for fast ramping dispatchable resources, • Improved efficiency and flexibility of fossil units, • Additional peaking capacity to support electrification of transportation and heating, • Provision of reliability services to support high penetration of VRE, especially synchronous inertia and fast frequency response. A Technology Readiness assessment by EPRI confirmed that LSCC technology consists of commercially proven hardware used in industrial and utility applications. Although the novel LSCC approach has not yet been demonstrated as a complete system, interfaces between major components have been conservatively specified. A Phase III pilot is planned to demonstrate equipment integration and operation. The patented innovation is removal of the evaporator section from the exhaust heat recovery system, with the evaporation performed by stored energy in a separate steam generator. This arrangement couples renewable and fossil power generation via long-duration energy storage to deliver cost, performance, and operational synergies, including superior charging and discharging flexibility, reduced fuel consumption and lower CO 2 emissions compared to conventional Combined Cycle Power Plants, and low-cost, large-scale energy storage. The LSCC technology is composed of proven equipment integrated with gas turbine exhaust heat in a novel system. During charging, electric heaters raise the salt temperature as it flows from the Cold Salt Tank to the Hot Salt Tank. During discharging, hot salt produces steam from feedwater that is heated with gas turbine exhaust, which also superheats steam to drive a steam turbine. LSCC technology can be added to any combustion-turbine to integrate renewable energy, provide needed grid services, and increase the value of fossil electric generating units based on the technology’s following attributes: • Long-duration storage enables time-shifting of VRE to avoid curtailment and impairment of renewable assets. • Long storage duration combined with fast-charging capability increases arbitrage opportunities by storing more energy when the price is low and discharging more hours when the price is high. • Long storage duration allows resource adequacy to be supplied across multiple days to increase reliability and reduce risk. • The stored energy reduces fuel heat rate and GHG emissions, and increases merit, so the LSCC dispatches earlier and longer to increase the plant’s capacity factor and asset value. • The stored energy enables pre-heating and startup of the steam cycle, without operating the gas turbine, to enable fast startup and ramping when dispatched for discharge. • The steam turbine can operate without the gas turbine so it can provide valuable synchronous inertia during charging without consuming fuel. • Fast frequency response and regulation services can be provided during charging using solid-state heater and pump controls to vary the charge power input in response to grid signals. • The LSCC system can be configured for resilience including black start, islanded/micro-grid operation, and even self-recharging of storage using either gas turbine power or gas turbine exhaust heat. The commercialization plan is to add LSCC technology to existing simple cycle gas turbine power plants with the 50MW GE LM6000 aero-derivative gas turbine as the reference design basis. A Techno-economic assessment of the reference design evaluated the benefits (Levelized Avoided Cost of Energy) and costs (Levelized Cost of Energy). The plant definition included all major systems and budgetary vendor quotes. Pintail Power and NexantECA developed the overall cost estimate for the LSCC plant up to the total plant cost level, following the DOE-NETL cost estimate guidelines at AACE Class 3 (-20%/+30%). This includes the equipment cost, bulk material, direct and indirect labor costs to arrive at the bare erected cost. Engineering costs are factored from the BEC and added to it to arrive at the EPC cost. Process and project contingencies were then factored from the EPC cost and rolled-up to yield the total plant cost of $\$$184 million for 1746 MWh of discharge electricity. • At $\$$105/kWh, the reference plant costs less than any of the Energy Storage Systems evaluated by PNNL in 2020 for the Energy Storage Grand Challenge. Operations and Maintenance cost estimates were scaled from combined cycle practice, assuming that the LSCC unit was co-located with and sharing some labor expense with other units, to arrive at $\$$2.2 million per year. Plant economics were evaluated using prices from the ERCOT Day-Ahead Market for calendar year 2019 (excluding the market disruptions from the COVID pandemic and the February 2020 deep freeze event). Assuming economic dispatch in the ERCOT Day-Ahead market, the reference plant capacity factor would have discharged for 2777 hours at 91.9 MW, a 31.66% capacity factor, with a marginal cost of $\$$25.59/MWh, and a LACE of $\$$82.41/MWh. Fixed charges were calculated according to EIA guidelines to arrive at an LCOE of $\$$83.48. The benefit-to-cost ratio of 0.99 suggests that the reference plant would have been cost-effective and competitive in the market. EPRI interviewed selected utilities to gauge the need for, applicability of and interest in the LSCC system. Several utilities are currently managing increased load growth along with the inclusion of increasing levels of renewable generation, putting pressure on conventional generation by requiring increased turndown requirements and ultimately lower capacity factors. All of the utilities interviewed have CO 2 reduction targets in the 2030-2050 timeframe that will severely limit the participation of fossil generation and require better utilization of carbon free generation. While there is limited opportunity for storage in the current markets, the utilities interviewed stated that there will be a substantial need for long duration energy storage in the future given the expected trends. Utilizing an energy storage system will generally be preferred over new gas capacity in some cases, with the capabilities of the LSCC system being a potential option for retrofit to existing simple cycle gas turbine units, allowing them to deliver greater participation in the market with lower carbon intensity. A technology gap assessment and technology maturation plan identified a pilot-scale demonstration as the final step before commercialization. Key gaps to be addressed during the Phase II FEED (Front-End Engineering Design) are component selection and design, commissioning procedures, and operational procedures and the control system for LSCC charging and discharging. The project team has been expanded to include Wood Group PLC as EPC. The proposed Phase II work leads to a pilot-scale engineering demonstration (TRL 6) to be conducted at Southern Company’s Plant Rowan, where the prototype system will perform “all the functions that will be required of the operational system.” The proposed pilot will facilitate commercialization (TRL-9) by scale-up to utility-scale systems integrated with peaking GTs or directly to facility scale systems using industrial GTs. The conceptual design for the pilot plant focuses on the novel integration aspects of LSCC technology. A slipstream of gas turbine exhaust will feed a waste heat recovery unit coupled to a molten salt steam generator heated by stored energy. The pilot is intended to demonstrate all key operating modes of the LSCC technology during charging, discharging and standby. The pilot equipment will be approximately one-seventh scale of the LM6000 commercial target and is expected to have commercial off-ramp potential for facility-scale applications.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

CTES Pilot Plant Detailed Design Report

Energy storage is becoming an increasingly important component on modern power grids to ensure sufficient balancing capability for intermittent renewable power generations is available to maintain system reliability. Although energy storage has traditionally been provided by pumped storage hydroelectric systems, it is not possible to install these at every location and they can be expensive to construct. Lithium Ion batteries are increasingly being used to carry out energy storage grid services, however these can be expensive when specified over a few hours of capacity. An alternative way to store substantial energy is to use thermal energy storage (TES). This has been deployed on concentrated solar units using molten nitrate salts as a storage media. Again, the cost of the material can be prohibitive, thus lower cost alternative materials are being actively sought, such as sand, rocks and concrete. This project investigates the potential for Concrete Thermal Energy Storage (CTES) when used to directly store thermal energy from a thermal plant source. This report represents the Detailed Design phase deliverables comprising of the process, mechanical, electrical, piping along with control and instrumentation documents. Civil and structural deliverables are included on a preliminary basis due to outstanding site investigation activities. CTES block transportation testing results and the pilot plant testing plan is also included in this report.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

Front End Engineering Design Report

Energy storage is becoming an increasingly important component on modern power grids to ensure sufficient balancing capability for intermittent renewable power generations is available to maintain system reliability. Although energy storage has traditionally been provided by pumped storage hydroelectric systems, it is not possible to install these at every location and they can be expensive to construct. Lithium Ion batteries are increasingly being used to carry out energy storage grid services, however these can be expensive when specified over a few hours of capacity. An alternative way to store substantial energy is to use thermal energy storage (TES). This has been deployed on concentrated solar units using molten nitrate salts as a storage media. Again, the cost of the material can be prohibitive, thus lower cost alternative materials are being actively sought, such as sand, rocks and concrete. This project investigates the potential for Concrete Thermal Energy Storage (CTES) when used to directly store thermal energy from a thermal plant source. This report represents the initial Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) deliverables that are submitted for the Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) safety review for process validation.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗